Immigration reform has been a hot button issue over the course of the last few years, and has grown even hotter in recent months as Presidential hopefuls debate their opinions. The recent proposal which will soon be debated in the Senate is anything but reform.(definition: the improvement or amendment of what is wrong, corrupt, unsatisfactory, etc.).

The Associated Press recently detailed the major provisions of the immigration deal. For purposes of this article I would like to focus strictly on one section:

CURRENT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

_They could come forward immediately and receive probationary legal status.

_Bill creates a four-year, renewable “Z” visa for those present within the U.S. unlawfully before Jan. 1, 2007.

_Undocumented immigrants may adjust status to lawful permanent residence once they pay $5,000 in fees and fines and their head of household returns to their home country.

_People under age 30 who were brought to the U.S. as minors could receive their green cards after three years, rather than eight.

_Undocumented farm workers who can demonstrate they have worked 150 hours or three years in agriculture can apply for green cards.

_No green cards for “Z” visa holders can be processed until “triggers” for border security and workplace enforcement have been met, estimated to take 18 months. Processing of green cards for holders of “Z” visas would begin after clearing an existing backlog, which is expected to take eight years.

It would appear to me that portions of this bill could be deemed as unconstitutional. Article I Section 9 of the US Constitution states “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed”. According to Wikipedia, an ex post facto law is “is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of acts committed or the legal status of facts and relationships that existed prior to the enactment of the law”

This immigration bill retroactively changes the legal status of those entering the country prior to January 1, 2007, therefore it can be considered an ex post facto law. The bill also makes an allowance for farm workers who came into the country illegally to receive green cards they would not be entitled to under current law.

Unfortunately, in order to challenge this bill in court, a person with standing would need to file the lawsuit. This means prior to this bill being reviewed by the Supreme Court, or any court for that matter, an individual would first need to prove they were harmed by the bills enactment.

I urge everyone to call or write their representatives in Congress and tell them not to support this un-constitutional bill.

Sphere: Related Content

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Congress, Constitution, Immigration, Supreme Court