Mediaboss Marketing

Known also as the Simpson-Mazzoli Act for its legislative sponsors, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 was passed by Congress as an attempt to control illegal immigration into the United States.

The legislation passed the U.S. Senate on a 63-24 vote and the House 238-173 in October 1986. President Reagan signed it into law shortly after on Nov. 6.

The federal law had provisions that restricted the hiring of illegal immigrants in the workplace and also allowed illegal immigrants already in the country to stay here legally and avoid deportation.

Rep. Romano Mazzoli, D-Ken., and Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo., sponsored the bill in Congress and steered its passage. Future generations of Americans will be thankful for our efforts to humanely regain control of our borders and thereby preserve the value of one of the most sacred possessions of our people: American citizenship, Reagan said upon signing the bill into law.

The president couldn't have been much more mistaken. People on all sides of the immigration argument agree that the 1986 Reform Act was a failure: it didn't keep illegal workers out of the workplace, it didnt deal with at least 2 million undocumented immigrants who ignored the law or were ineligible to come forward, and most of all, it didn't stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the country.

On the contrary, most conservative analysts, among them members of the Tea Party, say that the 1986 law is an example of how amnesty provisions for illegal immigrants encourage more of them to come.

Even Simpson and Mazzoli have said, years later, that the law didn't do what they hoped it would. Within 20 years, the number of illegal immigrants living in the United States had at least doubled.

Instead of curbing abuses in the workplace, the law actually enabled them. Researchers found that some employers engaged in discriminatory profiling and stopped hiring people who looked like immigrants Hispanics, Latinos, Asians to avoid any potential penalties under the law.

Other companies enlisted subcontractors as a way to insulate themselves from hiring illegal immigrant workers. The companies then could blame the middlemen for abuses and violations.

One of the failings in the bill was not getting wider participation. The law didn't deal with all the illegal immigrants already in the country and didn't reach out more effectively to those who were eligible. Because the law had the Jan. 1982 cutoff date, tens of thousands of undocumented residents were not covered. Thousands of others who might have participated were unaware of the law. In the end, only about 3 million illegal immigrants participated and became legal residents.

The failings of the 1986 law were often cited by critics of comprehensive immigration reform" during the 2012 election campaign and the congressional negotiations in 2013. Opponents of the reform plan charge that it contains another amnesty provision by granting illegal immigrants a path to citizenship and is sure to encourage more illegal immigrants to come here, just as its predecessor did a quarter-century ago.

Continue reading here:
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986

People come to the United States for the promise of freedom and opportunity. But the current immigration system in the United States is broken: Families are separated, immigrant workers are exploited, people die trying to cross the border, and there is rampant discrimination against immigrants.

How we treat newcomers should reflect the values of fairness and equality that define the United States as a country. We need a commonsense immigration process, one that includes a roadmap for people who aspire to be citizens.

For the vast majority of undocumented immigrants there is no line available. As theImmigration Policy Center points out, most undocumented immigrants lack the necessary family relationships to apply for legal entry, and those who do face years or decades waiting for a visa.

For Americas enormous economy, current limitations on the number of total green cards available are unreasonable. Even if a prospective immigrant meets green card requirements, the wait can be everlasting, according to the Immigration Policy Center.

There are currently 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. People move to make life better for themselves and their families. We need an immigration system that recognizes the hardships and contributions of people moving here, keeps families together here in this country, and creates a rational process of citizenship for new Americans. That will do more for the United States than expensive and impractical approaches like trying to deport millions of people or trying to wall off a 2,000-mile border.

Under current law, noncitizens convicted of whats known as an aggravated felony face automatic penalties that can trigger deportation. Yet the current definition of an aggravated felony is so expansive that it includes crimes as simple as a bar fight, theft, and failing to appear in court.

Judges have little discretion in whether or not to deport immigrants who have committed crimes in this category. People should not be deported without a judge being able to evaluate the circumstances of their case. Due process is central to the credibility of the American justice system. We should reject any policies that deny due process, for immigrants or anyone else.

Liberty should be the norm for everyone, and detention the last resort. In the overwhelming majority of immigration cases, detention is not necessary to effect deportations and does not make us any safer. Among those unnecessarily locked up are survivors of torture, asylum seekers, victims of trafficking, families with small children, the elderly, individuals with serious medical and mental health conditions, and lawful permanent residents with longstanding family and community ties who are facing deportation because of old or minor crimes.

This lock-up system is a massive waste of taxpayer dollars, costing $2 billion a year. Detainees are also exposed to myriad abusesfrom a lack of adequate medical and mental health care that has caused unnecessary deaths to rape and sexual assault.

Legislation inspired by Arizonas show me your papers law invites rampant racial profiling against Latinos, Asian-Americans, and others presumed to be immigrants based on how they look or sound. Racial profiling is an ineffective and harmful practice that undermines our basic values. We need to ensure that law enforcement officials are held to the constitutional standards we value as Americansprotecting public safety and the rights of all.

The Open Society Foundations support efforts to secure federal immigration reform and promote fair immigration enforcement, detention, and deportation policies.We have invested more than $100 million in immigrant rights in the United States since 1997.

See more here:
Why Does the U.S. Need Immigration Reform?

For historical purposes, this is the original text of the law, without any subsequent amendments. For the current texts of the laws we enforce, as amended, see Laws Enforced by the EEOC.

An Act to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to revise and reform the immigration laws, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States

of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCES IN ACT.

(a) SHORT TITLE. -- This Act may be cited as the "Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986". "8 USC 1101 note"

(b) AMENDMENTS TO IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT. -- Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Act, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed as an amendment to, or repeal of, a provision, the reference shall be deemed tobe made to the Immigration and Nationality Act.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sec. 1. Short title; references in Act.

TITLE I -- CONTROL OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

PART A -- EMPLOYMENT

Sec. 101. Control of unlawful employment of aliens.

Sec. 102. Unfair immigration-related employment practices.

Sec. 103. Fraud and misuse of certain immigration-related documents.

PART B -- IMPROVEMENT OF ENFORCEMENT AND SERVICES

Sec. 111. Authorization of appropriations for enforcement and service activities of the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Sec. 112. Unlawful transportation of aliens to the United States.

Sec. 113. Immigration emergency fund.

Sec. 114. Liability of owners and operators of international bridges and toll roads to prevent the unauthorized landing of aliens.

Sec. 115. Enforcement of the immigration laws of the United States.

Sec. 116. Restricting warrantless entry in the case of outdoor agricultural operations.

Sec. 117. Restrictions on adjustment of status.

PART C -- VERIFICATION OF STATUS UNDER CERTAIN PROGRAMS

Sec. 121. Verification of immigration status of aliens applying for benefits under certain programs.

TITLE II -- LEGALIZATION

Sec. 201. Legalization of status.

Sec. 202. Cuban-Haitian adjustment.

Sec. 203. Updating registry date to January 1, 1972.

Sec. 204. State legalization impact-assistance grants.

TITLE III -- REFORM OF LEGAL IMMIGRATION

PART A -- TEMPORARY AGRICULTURAL WORKERS

Sec. 301. H-2A agricultural workers.

Sec. 302. Permanent residence for certain special agricultural workers.

Sec. 303. Determinations of agricultural labor shortages and admission of additional special agricultural workers.

Sec. 304. Commission on Agricultural Workers.

Sec. 305. Eligibility of H-2 agricultural workers for certain legal assistance.

PART B -- OTHER CHANGES IN THE IMMIGRATION LAW

Sec. 311. Change in colonial quota.

Sec. 312. G-IV special immigrants.

Sec. 313. Visa waiver pilot program for certain visitors.

Sec. 314. Making visas available for nonpreference immigrants.

Sec. 315. Miscellaneous provisions.

TITLE IV -- REPORTS TO CONGRESS

Sec. 401. Triennial comprehensive report on immigration.

Sec. 402. Reports on unauthorized alien employment.

Sec. 403. Reports on H-2A program.

Sec. 404. Reports on legalization program.

Sec. 405. Report on visa waiver pilot program.

Sec. 406. Report on Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Sec. 407. Sense of the Congress.

TITLE V -- STATE ASSISTANCE FOR INCARCERATION COSTS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS AND

CERTAIN CUBAN NATIONALS

Sec. 501. Reimbursement of States for costs of incarcerating illegal aliens and certain Cuban nationals.

TITLE VI -- COMMISSION FOR THE STUDY OF INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION AND COOPERATIVE

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Sec. 601. Commission for the Study of International Migration and Cooperative Economic Development.

TITLE VII -- FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR DEPORTABLE AND EXCLUDABLE ALIENS

CONVICTED OF CRIMES

Sec. 701. Expeditious deportation of convicted aliens.

Sec. 702. Identification of facilities to incarcerate deportable or excludable aliens.

TITLE I -- CONTROL OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

PART A -- EMPLOYMENT

SEC. 101. CONTROL OF UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS.

(a) IN GENERAL --

(1) NEW PROVISION. -- Chapter 8 of title II is amended by inserting after section 274 (8 U.S.C. 1324) the following new section:

"UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS

"SEC. 274A. (a) "8 USC 1324a" MAKING EMPLOYMENT OF UNAUTHORIZED ALIENS UNLAWFUL. --

"(1) IN GENERAL. -- It is unlawful for a person or other entity to hire, or to recruit or refer for a fee, for employment in the United States --

"(A) an alien knowing the alien is an unauthorized alien (as defined in subsection (h)(3)) with respect to such employment, or

"(B) an individual without complying with the requirements of subsection (b).

"(2) CONTINUING EMPLOYMENT. -- It is unlawful for a person or other entity, after hiring an alien for employment in accordance with paragraph (1), to continue to employ the alien in the United States knowing the alien is (or has become) anunauthorized alien with respect to such employment.

"(3) DEFENSE. -- A person or entity that establishes that it has complied in good faith with the requirements of subsection (b) with respect to the hiring, recruiting, or referral for employment of an alien in the United States has established anaffirmative defense that the person or entity has not violated paragraph (1)(A) with respect to such hiring, recruiting, or referral.

"(4) USE OF LABOR THROUGH CONTRACT. -- For purposes of this section, a person or other entity who uses a contract, subcontract, or exchange, entered into, renegotiated, or extended after the date of the enactment of this section, to obtain thelabor of an alien in the United States knowing that the alien is an unauthorized alien (as defined in subsection (h)(3)) with respect to performing such labor, shall be considered to have hired the alien for employment in the United States inviolation of paragraph (1)(A).

"(5) USE OF STATE EMPLOYMENT AGENCY DOCUMENTATION. -- For purposes of paragraphs (1)(B) and (3), a person or entity shall be deemed to have complied with the requirements of subsection (b) with respect to the hiring of an individual who wasreferred for such employment by a State employment agency (as defined by the Attorney General), if the person or entity has and retains (for the period and in the manner described in subsection (b)(3)) appropriate documentation of such referral bythat agency, which documentation certifies that the agency has complied with the procedures specified in subsection (b) with respect to the individual's referral.

"(b) EMPLOYMENT VERIFICATION SYSTEM. -- The requirements referred to in paragraphs (1)(B) and (3) of subsection (a) are, in the case of a person or other entity hiring, recruiting, or referring an individual for employment in the United States,the requirements specified in the following three paragraphs:

"(1) ATTESTATION AFTER EXAMINATION OF DOCUMENTATION. --

"(A) IN GENERAL. -- The person or entity must attest, under penalty of perjury and on a form designated or established by the Attorney General by regulation, that it has verified that the individual is not an unauthorized alien by examining--

"(i) a document described in subparagraph (B), or

"(ii) a document described in subparagraph (C) and a document described in subparagraph (D).

A person or entity has complied with the requirement of this paragraph with respect to examination of a document if the document reasonably appears on its face to be genuine. If an individual provides a document or combination of documents thatreasonably appears on its face to be genuine and that is sufficient to meet the requirements of such sentence, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as requiring the person or entity to solicit the production of any other document or asrequiring the individual to produce such a document.

"(B) DOCUMENTS ESTABLISHING BOTH EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION AND IDENTITY. -- A document described in this subparagraph is an individual's --

"(i) United States passport;

"(ii) certificate of United States citizenship;

"(iii) certificate of naturalization;

"(iv) unexpired foreign passport, if the passport has an appropriate, unexpired endorsement of the Attorney General authorizing the individual's employment in the United States; or

"(v) resident alien card or other alien registration card, if the card --

"(I) contains a photograph of the individual or such other personal identifying information relating to the individual as the Attorney General finds, by regulation, sufficient for purposes of this subsection, and

"(II) is evidence of authorization of employment in the United States.

"(C) DOCUMENTS EVIDENCING EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION. -- A document described in this subparagraph is an individual's --

"(i) social security account number card (other than such a card which specifies on the fact that the issuance of the card does not authorize employment in the United States);

"(ii) certificate of birth in the United States or establishing United States nationality at birth, which certificate the Attorney General finds, by regulation, to be acceptable for purposes of this section; or

"(iii) other documentation evidencing authorization of employment in the United States which the Attorney General finds, by regulation, to be acceptable for purposes of this section.

"(D) DOCUMENTS ESTABLISHING IDENTITY OF INDIVIDUAL. -- A document described in this subparagraph is an individual's --

"(i) driver's license or similar document issued for the purpose of identification by a State, if it contains a photograph of the individual or such other personal identifying information relating to the individual as the Attorney General finds,by regulation, sufficient for purposes of this section; or

"(ii) in the case of individuals under 16 years of age or in a State which does not provide for issuance of an identification document (other than a driver's license) referred to in clause (ii), documentation of personal identity of such othertype as the Attorney General finds, by regulation, provides a reliable means of identification.

"(2) INDIVIDUAL ATTESTATION OF EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION. -- The individual must attest, under penalty of perjury on the form designated or established for purposes of paragraph (1), that the individual is a citizen or national of the UnitedStates, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or an alien who is authorized under this Act or by the Attorney General to be hired, recruited, or referred for such employment.

"(3) RETENTION OF VERIFICATION FORM. -- After completion of such form in accordance with paragraphs (1) and (2), the person or entity must retain the form and make it available for inspection by officers of the Service or the Department of Laborduring a period beginning on the date of the hiring, recruiting, or referral of the individual and ending --

"(A) in the case of the recruiting or referral for a fee (without hiring) of an individual, three years after the date of the recruiting or referral, and

"(B) in the case of the hiring of an individual --

"(i) three years after the date of such hiring, or

See the original post here:
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986

The saga that is Comprehensive Immigration Reform continues (CIR). The tug-of-war over the developing legislation has continued with each side competing for leverage. Since 2013 there have been victories on both sides of the coin. Although a form of CIR was passed in the Senate last year, the debate has not been put to rest.Now the political battle has drawn attention to one politician in particular. House speaker John Boehner (R) has come into the limelight due to his unique position on the ongoing discourse over CIR. Many political experts highlight the complex situation surrounding Boehner. On one hand, it is an election year for many Republican house members who are fearful of political fallout in their districts which could become a reality if they dont support CIR. On the other hand, there is stark opposition to CIR in the GOP.

Boehner is caught between feuding sides within his own party as well as the Democratic party which has shown strong support for comprehensive immigration reform. What makes Boehner an interesting topic for analysis is the debate over which side he truly supports even though he is stuck in a position where he must try to appease all sides.

It is no secret that there is noticeable tension between the GOP and president Obama primarily over Obamacare. Boehner recently stated that progress over CIR was stalled due to these tensions. Some political experts would state that the GOP is using their advantage/control over CIR as a tool for leverage to start a new dialogue over Obamacare. Also contributing to this stalled progress is the fact that it is an election year and incumbents up for re-election are hesitant to become involved in a risky issue such as CIR.Realistically, those in support of CIR are facing some significant obstacles in the form of uncooperative GOP members. However, statements from key Democrats still appear optimistic. Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democrat Network stated that, I think Boehner has tried when referring to Boehners comments over CIRs slow development in the house. He goes on to say, We are as close as weve ever been. I havent given up. Whether Boehners statement is an effort to appease supporters of CIR or buy time for the GOP is anybodys guess.

Many conclude that Boehners recent remarks over CIR were simply an attempt to qualm an increasingly tense conference. House Republican leaders proposed vague guidelines whose purpose is to guide CIR. However, the immovable object in the form of some house republicans remained constant and did not support the new guidelines despite how vague and flexible they were.

Boehners peacekeeping tactics were seen again in this situation. By not rushing to a deal, he supported the percentage of the GOP that does not support CIR. Boehners tactical stalling also served another purpose it illustrated just how difficult obtaining votes would be to the groups lobbying Republicans to support immigration reform which include evangelical leaders and agricultural interest groups. Despite support from these powerful groups the fact remains that the votes needed to pass CIR are simply not there.

Boehner is currently stuck between a rock and a hard place which has garnered him some support from Democrats. Boehner will likely irritate conservatives by agreeing to a debt limit increase although it is likely that it will not extract sufficient concessions from president Obama.

Amidst the confusing tensions surrounding the topic of CIR, Boehner has actually been receiving some unexpected support from Democratic officials. Rather than denouncing his recent political moves, house Democrats have given Boehner room to maneuver. Some political analysts think that this is a sign of trust from Democrats. We could speculate that perhaps Boehner has won the trust of Democrats who may think he is legitimately trying to push CIR on House Republicans. Time will tell.

One of the major factors that are effecting CIR is the tension between House Republicans and President Obama. President Obama has not been able to sustain a healthy or productive working relationship with the GOP. Obamacare has created such a rift between the nations political parties that animosities from the decision on universal healthcare are now effecting comprehensive immigration reform. This relationship is making Boehners attempts at diplomacy between the party even more difficult.

The topic of the GOPs efforts to cater to the Hispanic population was recently discussed in an article on this website, GOP is Losing Support from U.S. Hispanic Population. The Republican party has recently received negative attention for their lack of attention for the growing Hispanic population in the United States. The growing influence of the Hispanic population in the U.S. political landscape has put pressure on House Republicans who are up for re-election in the coming year. Republicans who were previously in opposition to CIR have now begun taking a more moderate stance. This is arguably an attempt to avoid political fallout in areas with a high Hispanic population.

The fight for pursuing CIR remains difficult and even daunting. According to political activist and writer John Dickerson, the GOP House conference can be viewed into thirds. One third will more than likely never vote for any form of immigration reform which would be suitable to be signed into law; one third is cautious and reluctant to get on board and one third who would support an immigration bill.

The main point to take away is that conservative activists and grassroots organizations who can influence members who vote for a poorly structured immigration bill have more leverage than those pushing for passage of CIR. Also, Republicans in individual districts do not face any significant pressure from minority voters. There are 108 majority-minority districts and Republicans only control nine. Although the Hispanic demographic is a growing concern for the GOP, of the House Republicans who represent a district with a Hispanic population of twenty-five percent or higher, only a few are actually vulnerable.

Passing CIR will be no easy task, the tug-of-war will continue as neither side is showing any sign of letting up. Boehners future political moves will be interesting to observe in the coming weeks and months as he is dealt the difficult task of navigating the interests of all sides.

Beeraj Patel's philosophy is simple - make it easy for talented and ambitious individuals to have access to immigration materials so that they can make the choice which is right for them.

Read more:
John Boehner and Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Catholic Social Teaching on Immigration

The Catholic Church in the United States is an immigrant Church with a long history of embracing diverse newcomers and providing assistance and pastoral care to immigrants, migrants, refugees, and people on the move. Our Church has responded to Christs call for us to welcome the stranger among us, for in this encounter with the immigrant, the migrant, and the refugee in our midst, we encounter Christ.

A rich body of Church teaching, including Papal encyclicals, Bishops statements and pastoral letters, has consistently reinforced our moral obligation to treat the stranger as we would treat Christ himself. In the 2001 pastoral statement, Welcoming the Stranger Among Us: Unity in Diversity, the Bishops of the United States called upon the Catholic faithful to a conversion of minds and hearts, imploring us to communion and solidarity with diverse newcomers, and entreating us to find new and meaningful ways to welcome our immigrant sisters and brothers into our parishes, schools and communities. In 2003, the Bishops of the United States, together with the Bishops of Mexico, in the pastoral statement, Strangers No Longer: Together on the Journey of Hope / Juntos en el Camino de la Esperanza Ya no Somos Extranjeros acknowledged that the current immigration system is badly in need of reform and offered a comprehensive set of recommendations for changing U.S. laws and policies to bring about a more humane and just immigration system in the United States.

Quotesfrom Church Teachings on the Rights of Migrants and Refugees

CatholicSocial Teaching on Immigration and the Movement of Peoples

Church Teaching on Public Policy Related to Immigration

Catholic Church's Position on Immigration Reform

The Catholic Church and Immigrant Religious Workers

The Holy Sees Perspective on Catholic Social Teaching and Migration

Learn More About Immigrants and Immigration Reform in the United States

Why Don't Unauthorized Migrants Come Here Legally?

Visit the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Justice for Immigrants Campaign Website to:

Get Facts, Figures, and Answers to Frequently Asked Questions and to De-Bunk Myths

Learn More about the Work of the Church with Immigrants, Migrants, Refugees

The Bishops' Committee on Migration and its staff in Migration and Refugee Services (MRS) carry out the commitment of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to serve and advocate for refugees, asylees, forced migrants, immigrants, and other people on the move. Click on the link above to learn more about how MRS and the Church in the U.S. is working to create a world where immigrants, migrants and people on the move are treated with dignity, respect welcome and belonging.

Take Action in Solidarity with our Immigrant Sisters and Brothers

An Invitation to Serve Immigrants and Refugees

Parish activities to help immigrants, migrants, refugees and people on the move

Join the USCCBs Justice for Immigrants Campaign

Send a postcard to Congress expressing your support for meaningful and compassionate Comprehensive Immigration Reform

Help the Catholic Church in the U.S. to continue to welcome the stranger and to provide advocacy and services for our immigrant sisters and brothers by making a contribution to the National Catholic Fund for Migration and Refugee Services.

Contact Migration and Refugee Services

Read more here:
Immigration - usccb.org