SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
A group of Democratic lawmakers including Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.) and Rep. Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.) wrote a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to explain their opposition to the Trump administration's proposal to significantly hike fees for immigrants. (Photo: Erik McGregor/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images)
'Fundamentally Inequitable': Democratic Lawmakers Decry Trump's Proposal to Hike Immigration Fees
"When viewed as a whole," the lawmakers wrote, the slate of changes "appears to be a pretext to make the U.S. immigration system inaccessible to working class families and children."
Dec 31, 2019
A group of Democratic lawmakers on Monday outlined their opposition to a Trump administration proposal which would increase application and petition fees for immigrants and asylum seekers, calling the plan "fundamentally inequitable and contrary to our nation's values."
Under the proposed rule, published Nov. 14 in the Federal Register, the U.S. would be one of just four countries in the world that charge asylum-seekers for entry. An 83 percent increase in the naturalization fee, a 55 percent increase in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) renewal fee, a 20 percent increase in employment authorization application fees, and an elimination of some fee waivers were also included in the proposal, which was panned by immigrant rights advocates as "outrageous" and "simply barbaric."
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), House Immigration and Citizenship Subcommittee Chair Zoe Lofgren (Calif.), House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita M. Lowey (N.Y.), House Homeland Security Appropriations Chairwoman Lucille Roybal-Allard (Calif.), and Senate Subcommittee on Border Security and Immigration Ranking Member Dick Durbin (Ill.) expressed their concerns in a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which is an agency of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
DHS's explanation for the fee changes is unsatisfactory and because of the proposal's disproportionate impact on working class families, the plan "ignores clear congressional intent to create a fair and accessible immigration system," wrote the lawmakers.
"We are particularly troubled by DHS's proposal to transfer roughly $112 million per year in immigration benefits fees to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)," they added.
"Over the last few years, Congress has denied DHS's requests to transfer such fees to ICE, and it has continued to fully fund ICE's operations by direct appropriation of discretionary funds," the lawmakers wrote. "The proposed transfer runs contrary to this clear congressional intent, as well as clear congressional intent in separating the department's immigration adjudication functions from its enforcement functions."
"When viewed as a whole," the letter continued, "DHS's proposed fee increase, coupled with the elimination of most fee waivers, appears to be a pretext to make the U.S. immigration system inaccessible to working class families and children."
Monday marked the final day for the comment period on the proposal.
President Donald Trump's immigration policies and rhetoric--including putting children in cages and tear-gassing migrants--have drawn scrutiny from human rights advocates throughout his time in office.
"The administration has literally every month enacted new fundamental restrictions on the rights of immigrants and in particular, the rights of asylum-seekers at the border," ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt told CBS News this week.
"What we saw during the family separation crisis is that public outcry was just as critical as the court actions," added Gelernt, "and that ultimately what we need, and what every civil rights movement needs, is the public to come out and forcefully say that they don't want this thing done in their name."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A group of Democratic lawmakers on Monday outlined their opposition to a Trump administration proposal which would increase application and petition fees for immigrants and asylum seekers, calling the plan "fundamentally inequitable and contrary to our nation's values."
Under the proposed rule, published Nov. 14 in the Federal Register, the U.S. would be one of just four countries in the world that charge asylum-seekers for entry. An 83 percent increase in the naturalization fee, a 55 percent increase in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) renewal fee, a 20 percent increase in employment authorization application fees, and an elimination of some fee waivers were also included in the proposal, which was panned by immigrant rights advocates as "outrageous" and "simply barbaric."
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), House Immigration and Citizenship Subcommittee Chair Zoe Lofgren (Calif.), House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita M. Lowey (N.Y.), House Homeland Security Appropriations Chairwoman Lucille Roybal-Allard (Calif.), and Senate Subcommittee on Border Security and Immigration Ranking Member Dick Durbin (Ill.) expressed their concerns in a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which is an agency of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
DHS's explanation for the fee changes is unsatisfactory and because of the proposal's disproportionate impact on working class families, the plan "ignores clear congressional intent to create a fair and accessible immigration system," wrote the lawmakers.
"We are particularly troubled by DHS's proposal to transfer roughly $112 million per year in immigration benefits fees to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)," they added.
"Over the last few years, Congress has denied DHS's requests to transfer such fees to ICE, and it has continued to fully fund ICE's operations by direct appropriation of discretionary funds," the lawmakers wrote. "The proposed transfer runs contrary to this clear congressional intent, as well as clear congressional intent in separating the department's immigration adjudication functions from its enforcement functions."
"When viewed as a whole," the letter continued, "DHS's proposed fee increase, coupled with the elimination of most fee waivers, appears to be a pretext to make the U.S. immigration system inaccessible to working class families and children."
Monday marked the final day for the comment period on the proposal.
President Donald Trump's immigration policies and rhetoric--including putting children in cages and tear-gassing migrants--have drawn scrutiny from human rights advocates throughout his time in office.
"The administration has literally every month enacted new fundamental restrictions on the rights of immigrants and in particular, the rights of asylum-seekers at the border," ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt told CBS News this week.
"What we saw during the family separation crisis is that public outcry was just as critical as the court actions," added Gelernt, "and that ultimately what we need, and what every civil rights movement needs, is the public to come out and forcefully say that they don't want this thing done in their name."
A group of Democratic lawmakers on Monday outlined their opposition to a Trump administration proposal which would increase application and petition fees for immigrants and asylum seekers, calling the plan "fundamentally inequitable and contrary to our nation's values."
Under the proposed rule, published Nov. 14 in the Federal Register, the U.S. would be one of just four countries in the world that charge asylum-seekers for entry. An 83 percent increase in the naturalization fee, a 55 percent increase in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) renewal fee, a 20 percent increase in employment authorization application fees, and an elimination of some fee waivers were also included in the proposal, which was panned by immigrant rights advocates as "outrageous" and "simply barbaric."
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (N.Y.), House Immigration and Citizenship Subcommittee Chair Zoe Lofgren (Calif.), House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita M. Lowey (N.Y.), House Homeland Security Appropriations Chairwoman Lucille Roybal-Allard (Calif.), and Senate Subcommittee on Border Security and Immigration Ranking Member Dick Durbin (Ill.) expressed their concerns in a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which is an agency of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
DHS's explanation for the fee changes is unsatisfactory and because of the proposal's disproportionate impact on working class families, the plan "ignores clear congressional intent to create a fair and accessible immigration system," wrote the lawmakers.
"We are particularly troubled by DHS's proposal to transfer roughly $112 million per year in immigration benefits fees to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)," they added.
"Over the last few years, Congress has denied DHS's requests to transfer such fees to ICE, and it has continued to fully fund ICE's operations by direct appropriation of discretionary funds," the lawmakers wrote. "The proposed transfer runs contrary to this clear congressional intent, as well as clear congressional intent in separating the department's immigration adjudication functions from its enforcement functions."
"When viewed as a whole," the letter continued, "DHS's proposed fee increase, coupled with the elimination of most fee waivers, appears to be a pretext to make the U.S. immigration system inaccessible to working class families and children."
Monday marked the final day for the comment period on the proposal.
President Donald Trump's immigration policies and rhetoric--including putting children in cages and tear-gassing migrants--have drawn scrutiny from human rights advocates throughout his time in office.
"The administration has literally every month enacted new fundamental restrictions on the rights of immigrants and in particular, the rights of asylum-seekers at the border," ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt told CBS News this week.
"What we saw during the family separation crisis is that public outcry was just as critical as the court actions," added Gelernt, "and that ultimately what we need, and what every civil rights movement needs, is the public to come out and forcefully say that they don't want this thing done in their name."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.