The following piece is based on a presentation given by María Jiménez at the Immigrant Community Organizers’ Working Group gathering of the National Organizers’ Alliance in July, 2000. A veteran of the immigrant rights movement for over 20 years, María’s insight and analysis on the right to legal status bring a key perspective to today’s debate over legalization.

The most concrete roots of current struggles for legalization can be found in the 1924 creation of the Border Patrol (whose early mission was to keep Chinese immigrants out), and 1929 laws that introduced the concept of labeling immigrants as “legal” or “illegal.” After 1929, laws that had previously excluded individuals based on nationality, political beliefs, or criminal records, were joined by laws targeting people for moving across borders without documents.

Labor and migration have always been interconnected. Many immigration policies, such as the Bracero Program of the 1940s and today’s employer sanctions, are directly tied to the abilities of individual employers to control their workers’ legal status. Immigration enforcement agencies are the only armed force that can police employee-employer relations.

• 245(i): A provision of immigration law, now expired, which allowed people on the verge of gaining their immigration status to remain in the U.S. Without this option, immigrants returning to their home countries to process their paperwork could be prevented from returning to the U.S. due to new 3 and 10 year bars. • AEDPA: The Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, passed in 1996, allowed the U.S. government to use secret evidence to accuse immigrants of terrorist acts. Also eliminated waiver that allowed permanent residents convicted of crimes to avoid deportation and implemented “summary exclusion” of asylum seekers. • Employer Sanctions: First federal law criminalizing the hiring of undocumented workers and requiring employers to verify workers’ documents. Criticized for causing more discrimination and undermining labor rights. • H-1B: A provision of immigration law that allows companies to hire “skilled” foreign workers to work in the U.S. under special temporary visas. (See page 13) • H-2A: A provision of 1986 immigration law that allows U.S. growers to import migrant “guestworkers” as temporary farm labor. (See page 12) • IIRIRA: The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Changed a provision that allowed certain longtime immigrants to defend themselves against deportation and become permanent residents. Also increased border enforcement, limited political asylum, and made family unification more difficult, requiring sponsors to earn 125% above the poverty level. • IRCA: The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 included a legalization or “amnesty” program for undocumented immigrants; imposed first employer sanctions; authorized major increases in border militarization; and expanded guestworker programs. • Late Amnesty: About 300,000 people were improperly denied the opportunity to apply for the 1986 amnesty; many were granted temporary status while cases pending in court. In 1996, Congress stripped courts of jurisdiction over cases, leaving many long-time residents in limbo. • NACARA: The Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act, passed by Congress in 1997.

Today, an individual’s freedom of movement is based on a number of categories, including social class, economic resources, political status, and country of origin. At the same time that political and social elites of nearly any nationality can gain legal entrance to the U.S., for the working poor, crossing the border can be dangerous and even deadly. The militarization of the U.S./Mexico border has long been a concern among immigrants rights groups.

The U.S. government pours billions of dollars into the enforcement programs of the INS, which now has more armed agents with arrest power than any other federal law enforcement agency. Migrants have few options for obtaining documentation or entering the country safely, and the few options available are either inaccessible to most migrants or represent a form of legalized exploitation. The investor clause, which provides permanent residency to immigrants who are able to prove that they have invested money in a U.S. business and are able to employ others, clearly favors immigrants with previous financial resources — something that workers who enter under bracero-type programs will never attain. For the last thirty years, immigrants rights activists have been fighting for the right of residency for all undocumented immigrants in the U.S. Legalization movements in the U.S. began in the 1970s as community-based struggles, and later grew into a national movement which culminated, after more than twelve years of struggle, in the 1986 legalization bill.

However, this came at a cost: the enactment of employer sanctions. In addition, many people were ineligible for the 1986 amnesty, and subsequent immigrants have dealt with the same issues of undocumented status.

As movements for legalization and immigration law reform once again move to the forefront of the immigrants rights’ — and now the labor movement’s — agenda, the fundamental principles guiding our work must be examined. Groups must unite and demand legal status for all migrants, regardless of national origin or financial status, by fighting for global recognition of the human right of mobility. While legal permanent residency for all immigrants is crucial, the right of migrants to cross borders safely and legally should be our main demand.

At the same time, language used to fight for such rights should reflect the reality of the movement’s goals. For example, when we fight for amnesty, we must wonder, amnesty from what? We die in the desert, we die in the workplace, we sacrifice our lives for our families’ survival —why should they “forgive” us? I prefer to describe our struggles as a fight for the rights of residency and mobility, and for demilitarization of borders. We need to re-evaluate the terms of resistance in order to examine the links between the past and the future.