Register | Login

Published News » immigration equality rights

The press has made much of how evangelicals -- remember, those people who only care about abortion and same sex marriage! -- are embracing a bigger agenda and breaking ranks with Republicans by endorsing comprehensive immigration reform.

But as I reported on Monday, that support comes with a caveat: no equality for gay and lesbian couples.

Now religious groups who support LGBT equality have pushed back, issuing a statement through the group Immigration Equality Action Fund condemning evangelical efforts to exclude the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) from a comprehensive reform package.

"U.S. immigration law prioritizes family unity. Marrying a citizen is still the most common way to get residency, and everyone knows there are more than a few scam marriages squeaking through. Yet for gays, it's a very different story. Since federal law only recognizes marriages between men and women, gay partners are left with no way to sponsor each other to stay in the country.

"Now that Arizona's 'papers please' law has pushed immigration reform to Washington's front burner, Democrats propose allowing 'permanent partners' to be treated the same as spouses under immigration law. While 19 countries have similar policies, it won't be an easy sell: The gay lobby fears they'll be sacrificed as a bargaining chip to get Republicans on board, while pro-immigrant groups worry that adding in gays will ruin any chance for reform for everyone else.

"While critics say le
Next week the D.C. Council will discuss a resolution showing support of the Uniting American Families Act pending in Congress.

Councilman At-Large David Catania authored the resolution last week, and the other 12 members of the council co-introduced it.

U.S. immigration law does not allow same-sex citizens and permanent residents to sponsor foreign-born partners for immigration benefits.

The UAFA, introduced in the House by U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., and in the Senate by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., would "amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate discrimination in the immigration laws by permitting permanent partners of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents to obtain lawful permanent resident status in the same manner as spouses of citizens and lawful permanent residents and to penalize immigration fraud in connec
You're from the United States. You fall in love with a foreign national. Straight couples have legal recourse in this situation: get married and sponsor your spouse for citizenship.

Gay couples in this situation have no legal recourse, an issue that SF Weekly recently highlighted with the stories of several same-sex couples who were separated by US immigration law, or had one partner living in the United States illegally.

Because the federal Defense of Marriage Act prohibits legal recognition of same-sex relationships, couples married in California, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and Vermont can't sponsor their spouses for citizenship either.

Democrats in the Senate have included a provision for same-sex couples in their immigration reform proposal released April 29, which will give them the same immigration rights as straight cou
Grassroot sloggers amount to a handful, a small dedicated group that has done an enormous amount of work with no resources at hand. This group of people, some under the Out4Immigration banner and others unpaid independent activists have fought hard for the ideal of one basic right – Equality – and in this instance equality under the immigration law.

Gays and Lesbian spouses in the USA cannot sponsor foreign born partners for immigration to the USA, commensurate with that very right, freely exercised by different-gender couples.

Contextually, this fight has been going on for well over a decade and has a history of Bills introduced, none of which garnished as much traction as the Bill introduced by Democratic Congressman Jerrold Nadler of New last year, The Uniting AMERICAN Families Act. (UAFA)
Our earlier reports came to fruition when today the Unites States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Association of Evangelicals, urged through a press call for support of comprehensive immigration reform and specifically for the exclusion of same-sex partners from immigration reform, thereby insisting on the status quo for gay and lesbian couples – exile, detention, hiding and no visas or sponsorship for same-sex couples in loving committed relationships.

However Immigration equality thinks this is no big deal and assert that the gay community has the upper hand on this one.

Today Steve Ralls, the spokesperson for Immigration Equality, speaking again to Kerry Eleveld at to the Advocate – said the breadth of support that has developed for folding gay families into the bill puts conservatives at a disadvantage. The combination of all those things
President Obama must pursue the repeal of DOMA as an absolute priority and even so UAFA; the Uniting American families Act, also a priority above Immigration Reform, ahead of ENDA. The President has it in his power to insist that Speaker Pelosi bring at least UAFA legislation to a Vote before the election in November.

Mr. President – The bi-national couples, despite poor leadership and wild goose chases, want UAFA as a stand alone Bill- we are not willing to wait for Immigration reform, the latter still unavailable in Bill form. Frameworks do not cut it for us as we wait in fear, detention, exile, suicidal, desperate, lonely!
For supporters of LGBT rights, the election of President Obama represented an apparent historical turning point for sexual minorities in our country. As a presidential candidate, Obama had said all of the rights things: he criticized the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy (DADT); he called for the enactment of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would protect employees against sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination; and called for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

But now that almost a third of Obama's first term has gone by, there is growing despair among many of his LGBT supporters over how little the administration has accomplished on gay rights. We have been here before. Eighteen years ago many gay rights advocates celebrated the election of President Clinton, the first presidential candidate to reach out to the LGBT c
“Let me die, die trying; if I fall, at least my heart will have been true. Let me die, die trying; I can cry tomorrow if I do.”

Kristen Hall intertwines the necessary optimism and ever-lingering pessimism same-sex bi-national couples suffer in these two lines from one of my favourites of her insightfully written songs. When I listen to her velvety voice wrapping itself around these words, I feel the bristle of pain and anger that springs from a relationship started with pure joy and naïveté. Like many who are partnered with a same-sex foreigner, I often find myself teetering between tossing in the towel and jumping full force into the uncertainty of starting over, propelled equally by love and desperation.

I’m not over-dramatising—I’m a girl in love with a girl who just happens to come from another country, my country’s greatest ally—the United Kingdom. The mor
U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Chicago), joined by fellow Reps. Mike Quigley (D-Chicago) and Jared Polis (D-Colo.), called May 24 for the inclusion of gay and lesbian binational couples in the comprehensive immigration reform measure now before Congress.

"Our legal immigration system is so dysfunctional and restrictive that we have created incentives for people to go around our system rather than going through it," Gutierrez said. "Nowhere is this more true than for committed same-sex couples who have to make a painful choice between their family and the immigration laws of the U.S. that do not recognize these family units for the purposes of immigration."

At a press conference at the Center on Halsted, Gutierrez said U.S. laws that allow heterosexuals to sponsor a partner for citizenship, but not gays and lesbians, send the wrong message.

"It seems t
A Brazilian man was reunited with his American husband this week after a U.S. senator pressed federal officials to temporarily allow the gay man back into the country on humanitarian grounds.

Nearly three years ago, the couple split when Oliveira was forced to return to Brazil after being denied permanent residency in the U.S. because the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages.

The pair maintained contact through online video chats and sporadic visits during holidays.

The case gained international attention from gay rights and immigrant advocates who criticized U.S. officials for separating the couple even though they were legally married.
A Brazilian man was reunited with his Massachusetts husband this week after U.S. Sen. John Kerry pressed federal officials to temporarily allow the 31-year-old gay man back into the country on humanitarian grounds.

Brazilian-born Genesio "Junior" Oliveira rejoined Tim Coco, 49, of Haverhill, at an emotional reunion at Boston's Logan International Airport.

Gay rights and immigrant advocates declared the case a rare victory for gay, married asylum seekers.
NEW YORK, Apr 7, 2010 (IPS) - Tom is in love. It's an old story: he noticed an attractive stranger at a friend's party, and the attractive stranger noticed Tom. They began talking, then dating, and then they fell in love. For a while, they enjoyed a perfect romance.

Eventually, though, they had to face the fact that their future would be fraught with possibly insurmountable challenges. Their problem is not a previous relationship or children, not a chronic illness or a lie revealed. It's that Tom's partner is not a U.S. citizen, they are both men, and they are trying to make a life together in the United States, whose laws do not recognise their relationship.

A new poll released by the University of Washington shows a surge in support for marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples.

We need to make sure that voters in Washington understand that until Washington State issues marriage licenses to its gay and lesbian citizens we will not be able to make progress towards these important federal protections such as social security, immigration rights, and equal treatment under the IRS tax code."
Not that Giannoulias doesn't deserve HRC's endorsement, or your vote. He sounds like he does!: "As the next senator from the great state of Illinois, I will lead the fight for equality — for marriage equality, for an end to DOMA, for employment non-discrimination, and for immigration reform that treats same-sex couples fairly."

If you can't count on the Human Rights Campaign to effectively lobby lawmakers to actually effect change, at the very least you can, say, use their Corporate Equality Index to decide whether your contribution to climate change should be backed by the gay-friendly Chevron or the gay-hating ExxonMobil. And then there's HRC's recommendations for who you should vote for, which, with Rep. Mark Kirk, it just proved you shouldn't really trust either.
Sort News
Username:

Password:

Remember:

Follow on Twitter
Feedburner

Subscribe with Bloglines

Promoting public awareness of the need for fairness in immigration policy particularly as it relates to the rights of same-sex bi-national couples in the United States who seek equal immigration rights; Providing information regarding political issues relating to gay immigration equality issues, rights and policy.