[Rep. Goodlatte] who opposed Citizenship May Be Open About ‘Final Status’ for Dreamer

Ianus · 08-22-2013, 12:18 PM

http://thinkprogress.org/immigration...ship-dreamers/

Quote:

House Judiciary Chair Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) stirred up questions about the future of immigration reform when he said on Monday that he would not support citizenship even for young undocumented immigrants who came to this country as children. But Goodlatte may be softening his position. An aide told ThinkProgress Wednesday night that Goodlatte “remains open” about the final legal status of DREAMers and their parents. The aide wrote in an email:

Quote:

As [Goodlatte] has said before he is interested in considering legislation that provides a legal status to those who were brought illegally to the U.S. as children by their parents and he remains open about final status for these individuals but enforcement will have to be first.

As the top Republican on a committee that will draft an immigration bill, Goodlatte’s opposition on citizenship puts him at odds with Republican leadership, almost two dozen House Republicans, and a majority of Republican primary voters.

Goodlatte told constituents at a town hall and again with the conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt that he is against a “special path” for undocumented youths, or so-called DREAMers. He emphasized the need for piecemeal “enforcement first” border security bills to be hashed over when House Republicans come back from the August recess. On the Hugh Hewitt Show, Goodlatte said:

Quote:

In my opinion if you, after you have the borders secure and these enforcement mechanisms in place. If you were to do something, I would start first of all with children who were brought here illegally by their parents. They’ve grown up here. They’ve been educated here. They are ready to face the world and they have no documents. I think there’s a more compelling argument to be made for them. But, even for them, I would say that they get a legal status in the United States and not a pathway to citizenship that is created especially for them. In other words, they get that legal status if they have an employer who says I’ve got a job which I can’t find a U.S. citizen and I want to petition for them, ah, they can do that, but I wouldn’t give them the pathway to a Green Card and ultimately citizenship based simply on their entering the country illegally.

Goodlatte’s current position to grant legal status, but not citizenship to DREAMers, is one that goes against the basic bipartisan compromise for immigration reform that was in place since the trade-off for the Senate immigration bill had been border militarization for an eventual pathway to citizenship.

Goodlatte’s opposition to citizenship also goes against the opinions of Republican leaders House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), who support citizenship for DREAMers out of “decency” and “compassion.” At the time, Boehner appeared alongside Cantor who said, “These, in many instances, are kids without a country if we don’t allow them to be full citizens of our country…It is not only a system–a issue of fairness, as the speaker said, it’s an issue of decency, of compassion.” However, like Goodlatte, the third highest ranking member of the House, Majority Whip McCarthy has only come out in favor of legal status, but stopped short of supporting citizenship.

Meanwhile, some House Republicans have taken the August recess to throw their support behind an earned pathway to citizenship not just for DREAMers but for all of the 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the United States. Since the beginning of the August recess, at least four House Republicans have supported citizenship. Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY) specifically supports citizenship for DREAMers. In all, 23 House Republicans have so far come out in support of an earned pathway to citizenship.

According to several recent polls, a majority of Republican primary voters support the Senate immigration bill that provides eventual citizenship to millions of undocumented immigrants. Still, Goodlatte’s position squarely falls in line with that of the Republican National Committee (RNC) and many rank House Republicans. Democrats, meanwhile, have said they will not accept any bill that does not include a path to citizenship.

DA User · 08-22-2013, 10:14 PM

I agree with Goodlatte.

Pianoswithoutfaith · 08-22-2013, 11:55 PM

What do you agree with specifically?

DA User · 08-23-2013, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pianoswithoutfaith

What do you agree with specifically?

Secure border first than Dream Act. I like what he said about a path to USC using current channels.

Pianoswithoutfaith · 08-23-2013, 05:12 AM

What did he say?

Happyman0607 · 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DA User

Secure border first than Dream Act. I like what he said about a path to USC using current channels.

Agreed secure the boarders, give citizenship to the 25 and under

Perfect bill IMO

Pluribus · 08-23-2013, 05:29 PM

I'm not too sure about this one guys.

Quote:

But, even for them, I would say that they get a legal status in the United States and not a pathway to citizenship that is created especially for them. In other words, they get that legal status if they have an employer who says I’ve got a job which I can’t find a U.S. citizen and I want to petition for them, ah, they can do that, but I wouldn’t give them the pathway to a Green Card and ultimately citizenship based simply on their entering the country illegally.

He's saying that we get legal status, something like or below a GC?, if and when we get the job, through a petition from the employer?

Pianoswithoutfaith · 08-23-2013, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pluribus

I'm not too sure about this one guys.

He's saying that we get legal status, something like or below a GC?, if and when we get the job, through a petition from the employer?

at first I thought it was saying that citizenship is available if a employee petitions for you but it saying, no legal status until an employee petitions for you

KDG · 08-23-2013, 11:12 PM

To be honest with, I have been noticing a huge change around here. Before, everyone was United. And all that talk is only dividing all of us. We are here, on this forum, for the same Reason. Lets not forget that when the dream act was first introduced, most of us, receiving DACA now, were kids, not able to do anything and those who fought than are aged out now. Saying that some dreamers are more deserving than others is bullshit. They are trying to divide us and it is sad because it actually works.

satnam · 03:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pluribus

I'm not too sure about this one guys.

He's saying that we get legal status, something like or below a GC?, if and when we get the job, through a petition from the employer?

But only if the employer can prove there is no capable US person able to work this job. As it is with current law that would require "contests" for the job. Where the employer puts out ads (multiple times over multiple months publicly) and people apply. And then the employer is tested on this and has to prove there is no better US person candidate.

My friend who runs a business did this for his family member. It cost him over 17K and a ton of his own personal time. And furthermore his companies' AND his own personal records were vetted.

Hah... yeah no. Goodluck with that.

No company is going to bother sticking with you through this process UNLESS you are super awesome and truly one of a kind person that is required for that company to function. And we can't all be better than US citizens/LPRs already living in this country legally.

They need you!

Forum links

Resources

Join our list

National calendar of events

February

[Rep. Goodlatte] who opposed Citizenship May Be Open About ‘Final Status’ for Dreamer