The Senate is set to vote soon on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” – but a right-wing barrage of emails and calls opposing repeal is already well underway.

We need your help to drown them out and show that a majority of Americans wants this discriminatory law repealed – once and for all.

We have a chance to make history here. Please, send your message today.

Click here to act now.

Related posts:

1. TAKE ACTION: Pressure Senators to Ask HHS Nominee Kathleen Sebelius about the HIV Ban Help lift the HIV immigration ban...
2. TAKE ACTION: Help Keep Shelters Open and Expand Services to Survivors of Domestic Abuse The Family Violence Prevention and Services Act, a vital source...
3. TAKE ACTION: Tell the President to ban landmines (HRW) President Obama has an opportunity to get US landmine policy...

A test case on same-sex fairness

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Shirley Tan is a 43-year old Pacifica homemaker and mother of twin seventh-grade boys. Tan also wears an ankle bracelet assigned by immigration agents after a dawn raid on her home two months ago.

Barring a legal miracle, she faces likely deportation to the Philippines on Friday. That result would devastate her family and friends. But her case also touches off two flashpoint issues – immigration law and same-sex marriage – that are combining in a way that shows the unfairness of this country’s laws.

If she is deported, Tan will be separated from her partner Jay Mercado, who is a naturalized citizen. For straight couples, there wouldn’t be a similar problem because a citizen can sponsor a spouse for residency. But under the federal Defense of Marriage Act, this right doesn’t exist for an estimated 37,000 same-sex couples where one partner is a noncitizen.

Tan’s case also points up how ill-equipped and unfair immigration laws can be. She and her partner sought to legalize their status for years, pursuing their case through hearings and appeals with several lawyers.

But Mercado says the couple never learned of an adverse ruling in 2002, blaming the delay on a previous lawyer. Since then, the couple traveled, signed up for a real estate license and even passed a Homeland Security screening on a tourist visit to the White House. There was never a blip until the 6:30 a.m. door knock from immigration agents on Jan. 28.

There is a legal Hail Mary, a longshot chance via a rarely used power that members of Congress can use to single out individuals for a reprieve from deportation. Tan’s congresswoman, Democrat Jackie Speier, is considering her case.

But a fuller answer is needed: an overhaul of immigration law that would recognize special circumstances and also passage of the Uniting American Families Act. That measure would end the discrimination against gay and lesbian Americans and let them sponsor partners for immigration.

Keeping all families together is a goal worth achieving.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/01/EDB216Q4D8.DTL

This article appeared on page A – 14 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Related posts:

1. Washington Post calls for passage of UAFA The subhead says it all: “Gay couples should be allowed...
2. With Pretzel Logic, Restaurant Owners Attack San Francisco Health Care Law Talk about twisted logic. A group of San Francisco restaurant...
3. Defense of Marriage Act Challenge Filed – What Does it Mean for Binational Couples? Immigration Equality congratulates Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD)...

This is another good step towards restoring this country’s reputation as a defender of human rights and equality for all.

Apparently the Bush administration, which refused to sign the declaration, thought it was OK for gays to be treated as criminals, and punished with prison time or even death in some countries.

Obama is a friend to the LGBT community — to an extent. As a U.S. Senator, he voted against Senate consideration of the Federal Marriage Amendment of 2006, which would have constitutionally banned same-sex marriage.

On the other hand, while Obama supports civil unions which would give same-sex couples the same legal rights as married couples, he has said that he opposes same-sex marriage for religious reasons. He does, however, concede that it should be left up to the individual states.

And it seems as though he might be warming up to the idea.

This is a huge improvement over the past administration.

One step at a time.

Related posts:

1. United States Signs U.N. Declaration for GLBT Rights ...
2. VIDEO: Universal Declaration of Human Rights animation ...
3. VIDEO: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by Michel Streich ...

The call by a key national newspaper to end discrimination against gay and lesbian couples in immigration laws is a major step forward in the fight for equal immigration rights.

Separation Anxiety
Gay couples should be allowed to stay together in the United States.

Monday, March 16, 2009; A16

THE UNITING American Families Act would allow gay and lesbian Americans and permanent residents to sponsor their foreign-born partners for legal residency in the United States. The bill, introduced last month in the Senate by Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and in the House by Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), would add “permanent partner” and “permanent partnership” after the words “spouse” and “marriage” in relevant sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act. If passed, it would right a gross unfairness.

Under the proposal, a “permanent partnership” is defined as a “committed, intimate relationship” with another adult “in which both parties intend a lifelong commitment.” The couple must be financially interdependent and not married to or in a permanent partnership with anyone else. And the partners can’t be related. The benefit comes with the same immigration restrictions and enforcement standards that apply to heterosexual couples. Fraudulent permanent partnerships face the same penalties as fake marriages: up to five years in prison and up to a $250,000 fine.

“Under current law, committed same-sex foreign partners of American citizens are unable to use the family immigration system, which accounts for a majority of the green cards and immigrant visas granted annually by the United States,” Mr. Leahy said upon introducing the bill. “The promotion of family unity has long been part of federal immigration policy, and we should honor that principle by providing all Americans the opportunity to be with their loved ones.” According to the most recent census, he added, about 35,000 binational, same-sex couples are living in the United States. The new legislation would ensure that the family connections valued under immigration law are extended to gays and lesbians.

The strain of the status quo on gay and lesbian binational couples should not be discounted. Because their relationships are not legally recognized by the United States, some couples have resorted to illegal marriages where the foreign nationals marry Americans to get green cards that allow them to stay in the country permanently. In other cases, Americans have exiled themselves to be with their partners. Sixteen countries, including Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, South Africa and the United Kingdom, allow residents to sponsor same-sex permanent partners for legal immigration. American gays and lesbians should not have to choose between their country and their partners.

Related posts:

1. San Francisco Chronicle Calls for Passage of UAFA American citizen Jaylynn Mercado's partner of 23 years is scheduled...
2. Defense of Marriage Act Challenge Filed – What Does it Mean for Binational Couples? Immigration Equality congratulates Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders (GLAD)...
3. Obama Calls for Credit Card Protections President Barack Obama said yesterday the nation needs tougher laws...

But then the administration backpeddled a little and it became less of a priority.

As we all know, Obama was sworn in as President in January (two times!). That same month, the army fired eleven soldiers for being gay.

The Army fired 11 soldiers in January for violating the military’s policy that gay service members must keep their sexuality hidden, according to a Virginia congressman.

Democratic Rep. Jim Moran said he has requested monthly updates from the Pentagon on the impact of the policy until it is repealed. In a statement released on Thursday, Moran said the discharged soldiers included an intelligence collector, a military police officer, four infantry personnel, a health care specialist, a motor-transport operator and a water-treatment specialist.

“How many more good soldiers are we willing to lose due to a bad policy that makes us less safe and secure?” asked Moran, a member of the House panel that oversees military spending.

Last November, it was reported that more than 100 retired generals and admirals have called for the repeal of the policy. Earlier than that in July an ABC News poll showed the same trend with average citizens.

An ABC poll in July found that three-quarters of Americans supported allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military compared to 44 percent of Americans who expressed the same support in 1993, when President Bill Clinton approved “don’t ask, don’t tell” as what he called an “honorable compromise” that nevertheless bitterly disappointed his supporters in the gay community.

Moran is correct. This policy is terrible. Always was, always will be. It prevents American citizens from joining the military based on outdated and bigoted reasoning. Being gay isn’t a crime. It isn’t illegal. It shouldn’t be a roadblock to being in the military. Or anything else, for that matter.

Related posts:

1. Iowa Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage Mary Shaw writes about the recent decision in Varnum v....
2. Obama to sign UN gay rights declaration The AP reports that the Obama Administration will endorse a...
3. TAKE ACTION: “Tell your senators to vote YES to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell!” The Senate is set to vote soon on "Don't Ask,...

What is DOMA Section 3?

The “Defense of Marriage Act” was passed by Congress in 1996 and signed into law by then-President Bill Clinton. GLAD’s lawsuit challenges only Section 3 of the law, which excludes legally married same-sex couples from any federal law or program in which marriage is a factor.

There are at least 1,138 federal rights that depend on marriage recognition – including the right to sponsor a life partner for immigration benefits.

Is immigration law part of the challenge?

No. Immigration Equality and GLAD consulted on whether to include immigration as an element of the suit, and jointly decided that the case would be stronger without it. Congress has virtually limitless power to make decisions about who can immigrate to the U.S., and the courts almost always defer to Congress on immigration-related matters.

If they win the case, will that help binational couples?

Yes. If the suit is successful in striking down Section 3 of DOMA, that would be very good news for binational couples who are married, or could be married.

So should we get married?

Any binational couple considering marriage should consult with an immigration attorney. The answer depends on the immigration status of the foreign national partner. It is important to understand that every time a non-citizen seeks to enter the U.S. on a temporary visa – which is almost everything other than a “green card” – he or she must prove that they intend to return permanently to their own country. Marriage to a U.S. citizen, if disclosed to an Immigration official, may be taken as proof that the non-citizen intends to remain in the U.S. permanently. This will make it difficult, if not impossible, to get a visa or gain entrance to the U.S. If the foreign national partner is undocumented and you attempt to file a “green card” application for her based on marriage, the application will be denied and the partner will be placed in removal (deportation) proceedings.

What happens next? When will there be a decision?

GLAD filed the case on March 3, 2009 in Federal District Court in Boston. The case deals with questions of equal protection and the role of the states versus the federal government. Those questions are ultimately addressed by the Supreme Court, and it is likely that the Court will see this as an important case if, indeed, it is brought to them at some point in the future. That may not happen, but if it does, it will certainly not be decided by the Supreme Court any earlier than 2013.

We’re a binational couple – what should we do in the meanwhile?

The Uniting American Families Act is a bill that would change the immigration law to allow gay and lesbian Americans to sponsor their partners for green cards. In a new administration and a new Congress, the prospects for that bill look better than ever. It is imperative that you write and call your Congresspeople and ask them to cosponsor the Uniting American Families Act, and then have your family and friends do the same.

Immigration Equality is the only national organization devoted to binational couples – and that’s why we are fighting for immigration reform on multiple fronts. Binational couples desperately need a solution, which is why Immigration Equality is working with every branch of government – legislative, judicial, and executive – to end this cruel, purposeless discrimination.

Related posts:

1. The Economic Crisis Hits Binational Couples Hard Being in a same sex binational couple has always been...
2. Iowa Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage Mary Shaw writes about the recent decision in Varnum v....
3. Interracial Marriage: A Different Perspective Oliver Wang looks beyond black and white....