| | |
|
| |
|
|
<<previous | index | next>> Appendix A: The Uniting American Families ActThe Uniting American Families Act, H.R. 4006 (UAFA, formerly known as the Permanent Partners Immigration Act or PPIA) would, if passed, let U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents in binational same-sex relationships sponsor their foreign-born partners for immigration to the U.S. As the PPIA, the bill was first introduced in February 2000 by Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY). It gained fifty-nine cosponsors in its first year in the House of Representatives. In 2003, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) brought companion legislation before the Senate. “Our immigration laws treat gays and lesbians in committed relationships as second-class citizens, and that needs to change,” said Leahy. “This bill would add America to the growing list of nations that extend immigration benefits to same-sex couples. It is the right thing to do.” The UAFA was introduced in the current (109th) Congress on June 21, 2005. It has 104 cosponsors from both houses. The UAFA would fulfill the promise of family unification in the U.S. immigration system by extending eligibility to the foreign-born partners of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. It would add the term “permanent partner” to sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) where “spouse” now appears. Thus, a U.S. citizen or permanent resident could sponsor their permanent partner for immigration to the country, just as they can now sponsor such family members as siblings, children, or husbands and wives. One would qualify as the permanent partner of a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident if, among other things, one is:
A permanent partnership is not marriage and would not affect the federal definition of marriage. A successful application would confer no benefits other than immigration status for the foreign national. Because all binational lesbian and gay relationships would be subject to the same scrutiny that eligible heterosexual relationships currently face, the UAFA would not increase the possibility for immigration fraud through fake “partnerships.” The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will apply the same standards that it applies to marriages in determining whether a permanent partnership is genuine. Permanent partners, like married couples, would be required to prove emotional and financial commitment through (for instance) jointly owned property; shared child custody; joint bank accounts; joint credit cards; shared insurance policies; evidence of a commitment ceremony; or photographs of shared vacations and holidays with extended family. Applicants for permanent partnership benefits would face the same rigorous “green card” interview as married couples. If the interviewer suspects fraud, the partners would be subject to a second, still more rigorous interview in which they are questioned separately to determine whether the answers are consistent. Moreover, as with any family-based petition, the sponsor must submit an Affidavit of Support on behalf of the partner. The Affidavit of Support is a binding contract that lets the government sue if the immigrant accesses means-based benefits before working for a set period of time, generally ten years, or becoming a U.S. citizen. Finally, like married couples, partners who have been together for two years or less are only eligible to apply for conditional residence. This requires an additional interview with immigration officials at the end of the two-year conditional status to show that the couple is still together. Conditional residency also deters fraud. The UAFA would actually decrease marriage fraud by removing the reason for foreign partners of U.S. citizens to enter sham marriages—often exploitative and degrading—so that they can remain with their real partner in this country. It would discourage unlawful presence, and let people live open, honest lives. For otherwise law-abiding LGBT people running out of legal options, their relationships would no longer lead to choices no one should have to make. Supporters of the UAFA include:
A list of current Congressional cosponsors (and the dates of their sponsorship) of the UAFA follows. HOUSE COSPONSORS (94), ALPHABETICAL
SENATE COSPONSORS (10), ALPHABETICAL:
|
|
Contribute to Human Rights Watch
Home | About Us | News Releases | Publications | Info by Country | Global Issues | Campaigns | Community | Store | Film Festival | Search | Site Map | Contact Us | Press Contacts | Privacy Policy © Copyright 2006, Human Rights Watch 350 Fifth Avenue, 34th Floor New York, NY 10118-3299 USA |