Sean McCarthy
Member of the UUSJ Immigration Action Team

Maryland

 

I am a semi-retired attorney helping a few migrants apply for immigration benefits on a volunteer basis. My wife is a native of Colombia who came to the United States many years ago to study and work. We later adopted two beautiful children from Colombia. After I retired from corporate law, I answered a call to assist adults seeking asylum in the United States and unaccompanied minors who needed help applying for special immigrant status. Around the same time, I got involved with my church, helping immigrants resettle in our community. As a result, I have met good people from around the world seeking a better life here in America, some after being abandoned by one or both parents and others fleeing dangerous situations.

My experience with immigrants reinforces and makes tangible the reasons why I care about immigration justice and migrant rights. Even without such hands-on experience, I know others also care deeply about and support immigrant rights. In my case, I have also been lucky enough to be able to advocate for better, fair, and humane immigration laws and policies through UUSJ and its Immigration Action Team (IAT). (I also enjoy the fellowship and community in doing  IAT work.)

We on the IAT are very concerned about the recent struggles in Congress over immigration policy. In February, we and our immigration reform allies focused on helping to stop “compromise” legislation proposed in the U.S. Senate that threatened to curtail access to asylum severely. Our collective efforts resonated with perhaps a dozen Senators, notably Senator Padilla of California, who strongly opposed the legislative package containing this “compromise” despite it also containing funding for Ukraine and Israel. 

While the legislative package failed to win the 60 votes needed to advance in the U.S. Senate, unfortunately, this failure was not because nearly half the Senate opposed restrictions on asylum or the absence of pathways to citizenship for Dreamers or others. Instead, one leading candidate for president and the Speaker of the House vehemently opposed any immigration compromise short of legislation effectively shutting the border to all asylum seekers. In this maelstrom, many Senators supported an immigration “compromise” that fully satisfied no one simply because it was tied to badly needed funding for the Ukraine War. 

Going forward, we have a tough fight against legislation restricting access to asylum because it appears that both political parties are willing to do so in the right circumstances.    

For more than ten years, we have advocated for the U.S. Congress to enact comprehensive immigration legislation. We and our allies opposed the Senate compromise legislation because it unreasonably restricted the number of those who could enter the U.S. to begin an asylum claim and made no mention of creating pathways to citizenship for any of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the U.S. In addition, for those few asylum seekers allowed into the U.S., the proposed compromise raised the standard required to be met in the preliminary interview for them to remain and file their formal asylum application. 

Shockingly, in a seismic strategic political shift, the compromise did nothing to provide a path to permanent residence and citizenship for DACA recipients, more commonly known as “Dreamers” (undocumented immigrants who were brought to the US as children). We have a particular interest in DACA since the 2023 UUA General Assembly in Pittsburgh voted by an overwhelming margin to adopt an Action for Immediate Witness calling for a path to citizenship for the “Dreamers” and affirming that the “Unitarian Universalist Association supports the Dreamers and believes that they are valued members of our communities, as are other immigrant populations.” 

Although there could be other efforts this Session to attach “compromise” immigration legislation to appropriations or other bills, it appears that presidential politics will make it almost impossible to enact any immigration legislation this year. 

I maintain for UUSJ, the IAT, and me that the way forward is to continue to educate Congress, the Executive Branch, and the public on the need for legislation that provides pathways to citizenship for DACA recipients and other“Dreamers,” as well as long-term migrants with Temporary Protected Status, farm workers, and Afghan refugees among others. We plan to emphasize the many benefits immigrants bring to the United States, including increased economic growth and tax revenues.  

We care about immigration justice, and that will not change. Please vote for candidates who also care; we need a Congress willing to act for a welcoming system.