Amnesty vs Accountability
Amnesty is a general pardon for past offenses and can be extended to immigrants who have broken immigration laws. In a sense, amnesty is like grace in that it sets the person right before the law , but it is different in that it doesn't satisfy the demands of justice. Amnesty would give millions of undocumented immigrants the opportunity to begin with a completely new slate without acknowledging the offense or making restitution for it.
So, instead of blanketing all immigrants with amnesty, is there a solution besides amnesty that would promote justice?
Think on this:
In reality, the bipartisan Senate immigration reform bill—the “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013”—does not offer amnesty to undocumented immigrants: it actually requires accountability. Here’s what the bill (which you can read for yourself) proposes: one year after the bill is signed into law—once the Secretary of Homeland Security has submitted a complete plan with metrics to verify the security of the southern border—immigrant, in the country unlawfully, who have been present in the United States since at least 2011, would be eligible to apply for “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status. To be eligible to apply, they would need to be able to pass a criminal background, and they would have to pay an initial fine of $500 (in addition to processing fees) as well as any taxes that the IRS determines they owe.
If granted that RP I status, they would be granted work authorization for a six year period, but they will not be eligible for any means-tested public benefits and the status could be revoked for criminal activity or for various other reasons. After six years, they would be eligible to renew their RPI status only if they pay an additional $500 fine (plus processing fees), pass another background check, and demonstrate that they have been regularly employed and that their income is above the poverty level, ensuring they will not become a public charge.
After ten years, if certain “triggers” are met, these Registered Provisional Immigrants could be eligible to apply for Lawful Permanent Resident status. Before anyone with this status will be granted a “green card,” though, the U.S.-Mexico border must be secure, meeting specific targets contained within the bill. The Department of Homeland Security must have fully implemented a mandatory “E-Verify” system to ensure that all employers verify the legal status of their workers. Everyone currently waiting in the backlogged family-based immigration system for an immigrant visa through a petition from a relative must have been processed, ensuring that those who were present unlawfully in the U.S. are not granted permanent legal status prior to those who waiting for years. Finally, RPI status will be required to pay an additional $1,000 fine in addition to application fees before being granted Lawful Permanent Resident status.
Three years later—if they can pass a test of U.S. civics and history in English and meet various other existing requirements—those who chose to could apply to become U.S. citizens.
That’s what some folks are labeling as “amnesty?” The population control groups who explicitly oppose not just unlawful migration but almost all legal migration as well have a strategic reasons to label this bill as “amnesty.” This was made clear in testimony to the U.S. Senate. They know that most Americans oppose “amnesty for illegal aliens.” When they actually know what is in the bill, however the vast majority of Americans, including about three out of four Republicans according to a recent Wall Street Journal poll, are supportive. Americans including evangelical Christians, are rightly opposed to amnesty as a public policy, but we are for accountability, which is what is being proposed.
Most of my undocumented friends do not want amnesty either. They want to be able to earn legal status and to be right with the law, which is why most immigrant rights groups as well as immigrant churches are hoping and praying this bill will pass. In fact, as the bill’s co sponsor, Marco Rubio, has noted, the only real amnesty on the table is the status quo, doing nothing, where immigrants who have violated the law stay in the U.S. without any penalty for their offense and without any process to get right with the law. And that, if we do not join our immigrant brothers and sisters in speaking up, letting our legislators know where we stand, might be exactly what we get.
Amnesty is free grace: this bill is not. Though I do not believe amnesty is the right public policy, I think Christians, who believe we are saved by grace through Christ’s death on the cross, who could not possibly earn our salvation, and who may occasionally sin, should be slow to use the word amnesty in a disparaging way.
Thanks to my friend Matthew Soerens is the co-author of Welcoming the Stranger: Justice, Compassion & Truth in the Immigration Debate (InterVarsity Press, 2009) and the US Church Training Specialist at World Relief for his thoughts on this subject.
So, instead of blanketing all immigrants with amnesty, is there a solution besides amnesty that would promote justice?
Think on this:
In reality, the bipartisan Senate immigration reform bill—the “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013”—does not offer amnesty to undocumented immigrants: it actually requires accountability. Here’s what the bill (which you can read for yourself) proposes: one year after the bill is signed into law—once the Secretary of Homeland Security has submitted a complete plan with metrics to verify the security of the southern border—immigrant, in the country unlawfully, who have been present in the United States since at least 2011, would be eligible to apply for “Registered Provisional Immigrant” status. To be eligible to apply, they would need to be able to pass a criminal background, and they would have to pay an initial fine of $500 (in addition to processing fees) as well as any taxes that the IRS determines they owe.
If granted that RP I status, they would be granted work authorization for a six year period, but they will not be eligible for any means-tested public benefits and the status could be revoked for criminal activity or for various other reasons. After six years, they would be eligible to renew their RPI status only if they pay an additional $500 fine (plus processing fees), pass another background check, and demonstrate that they have been regularly employed and that their income is above the poverty level, ensuring they will not become a public charge.
After ten years, if certain “triggers” are met, these Registered Provisional Immigrants could be eligible to apply for Lawful Permanent Resident status. Before anyone with this status will be granted a “green card,” though, the U.S.-Mexico border must be secure, meeting specific targets contained within the bill. The Department of Homeland Security must have fully implemented a mandatory “E-Verify” system to ensure that all employers verify the legal status of their workers. Everyone currently waiting in the backlogged family-based immigration system for an immigrant visa through a petition from a relative must have been processed, ensuring that those who were present unlawfully in the U.S. are not granted permanent legal status prior to those who waiting for years. Finally, RPI status will be required to pay an additional $1,000 fine in addition to application fees before being granted Lawful Permanent Resident status.
Three years later—if they can pass a test of U.S. civics and history in English and meet various other existing requirements—those who chose to could apply to become U.S. citizens.
That’s what some folks are labeling as “amnesty?” The population control groups who explicitly oppose not just unlawful migration but almost all legal migration as well have a strategic reasons to label this bill as “amnesty.” This was made clear in testimony to the U.S. Senate. They know that most Americans oppose “amnesty for illegal aliens.” When they actually know what is in the bill, however the vast majority of Americans, including about three out of four Republicans according to a recent Wall Street Journal poll, are supportive. Americans including evangelical Christians, are rightly opposed to amnesty as a public policy, but we are for accountability, which is what is being proposed.
Most of my undocumented friends do not want amnesty either. They want to be able to earn legal status and to be right with the law, which is why most immigrant rights groups as well as immigrant churches are hoping and praying this bill will pass. In fact, as the bill’s co sponsor, Marco Rubio, has noted, the only real amnesty on the table is the status quo, doing nothing, where immigrants who have violated the law stay in the U.S. without any penalty for their offense and without any process to get right with the law. And that, if we do not join our immigrant brothers and sisters in speaking up, letting our legislators know where we stand, might be exactly what we get.
Amnesty is free grace: this bill is not. Though I do not believe amnesty is the right public policy, I think Christians, who believe we are saved by grace through Christ’s death on the cross, who could not possibly earn our salvation, and who may occasionally sin, should be slow to use the word amnesty in a disparaging way.
Thanks to my friend Matthew Soerens is the co-author of Welcoming the Stranger: Justice, Compassion & Truth in the Immigration Debate (InterVarsity Press, 2009) and the US Church Training Specialist at World Relief for his thoughts on this subject.