Justice Delayed

By: Joe Mauricio

 

Fifty years ago, President Lyndon B. Johnson stood in the shadow of the Statue of Liberty and signed a law that few Americans knew as much or cared about. But the law may be one of the most consequential pieces of the 20th centurylegislation, the basis of the modern U.S. immigration system which has diversified America and forced millions into the shadows.

The undocumented, the marginalized, and the underserved are waiting for half a century, and VIA Times is not going to wait for another 50 years with the immigrants.We can no longer wait for another half century for the much-awaited comprehensive immigration reform.

We like to suggest for a formation of an independent party when platform would be a common sense solution for the common good, and be ably led by many prominent persons that are the true independents of today.

A mix of conservatives and tea party mindset is what we want that will give the immigration reform a common sense solution.

It was merely the first step in a broader agenda to reform immigration laws (the only step that could be enacted) but the law did not turn out to be pretty revolutionary all by itself.

We don’t think lawmakers could have predicted just how much immigration would grow in the late 20th century after the law passed. And, unexpectedly, it brought in waves of immigrants who were quite different, both class-wise and in countries of origin, compared to pre-World War II immigration.

The Immigration Act is honored as a great step forward for racial equality, in the same vein as the Civil Rights Act and Voting Right.

The reformers argued that the new immigration law would primarily benefit Southern and Eastern Europeans, important allies in American Cold War battle against Communism.

But it was the Asians who had been all but banned from migrating to the United States in the first half of the 20th century, who took advantage of the Open Door policy.

The 1920 laws that created the quota system favored the Western European immigrants, mostly Germans and British, and a xenophobic Congress passed laws in the 20th century that explicitly excluded migrants from Asia.

The Immigration Act of 1965 altered the flavor of America’s melting pot, introducing the communities of Filipino- Americans, Korean Americans, Chinese Americans and Indian Americans that are now integral to the country’s social fabric.

In 1965, President Johnson said that the 1965 law also underscores the need for caution in today’s pro-reform movement as it weighs the inevitable trade-offs attached to any compromise bill. The immigration rights advocates must consider whether the positive of immigration reform outweighs the negative.

Just this month, the president’s plan to defer deportation is stalled, while the congressional starring contest continues. Congress, meanwhile, may put any deportations in peril if it cannot agree on a measure to continue funding the Department of Homeland Security.

The Republicans have been insisting on amending the funding bill to undo Obama’s immigration moves, but the Democrats have stalled it three times in the Senate and are expected to do so a fourth time.

Senate Democrats who claim to oppose this executive overhead will now let the Senate begin debates on a bill to fund the Homeland Security Department. Funding the agency may have temporarily stopped an expansion of legal status for millions of people here illegally.

No money means a drop in engorcement of existing law.