Citizenship Rules for Disabled Unveiled

The federal government unveiled long-awaited guidelines Tuesday that could allow tens of thousands of physically and mentally disabled immigrants, many of them in Los Angeles, to become U.S. citizens without passing English and U.S. civics tests.

The new rules, more than two years in the making, come as 500,000 elderly and disabled noncitizens nationwide--40% of them in California--face a cutoff this summer of federal Supplemental Security Income benefits.

Last year’s federal welfare overhaul made most noncitizens ineligible for food stamp vouchers--in some cases as early as next month--and SSI checks, which range up to about $650 monthly.

Facing a loss of what is for many their only income, aged and disabled noncitizens have been hastening to apply for naturalization and enrolling in citizenship classes. The new rules could remove a major barrier for many of them.

However, bulging naturalization backlogs--almost 1 million applicants are in the pipeline nationwide, more than one-quarter of them in the Los Angeles area--make it extremely unlikely that those applying now will attain citizenship in time to avoid the August termination date for benefits. The Immigration and Naturalization Service now takes at least nine months to process applications, and delays are growing.

Until now, virtually all citizenship applicants have been tested on basic English skills and asked such civics questions as the number of states in the United States, the name of the current president and the colors of the American flag.

Although that requirement has now been waived for the disabled, the INS, as expected, refused to modify its mandate that applicants--including Alzheimer’s patients--demonstrate the ability to take a “meaningful oath” of allegiance to the United States, the clinching act of citizenship. The oath is typically administered in a mass swearing-in ceremony, but INS examiners will continue to quiz applicants about it during the pre-ceremony personal interviews.

The new regulations drew mixed reactions from advocates for immigrants and the disabled.

“Unfortunately, this is too little too late for a lot of needy people,” said attorney Stephen A. Rosenbaum of the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, which sued the INS last year in U.S. District Court in San Francisco over its failure to act sooner.

The new guidelines are also controversial among groups seeking to restrict immigration, who say they cheapen the concept of citizenship.

“The whole process of becoming a U.S. citizen is being undermined,” said Ira Melhman, West Coast representative of the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

But INS officials said the rules underscore the agency’s commitment to giving disabled people a fair chance at becoming citizens.

“After a long and careful process, this regulation demonstrates the compassion and sensitivity that the INS has for persons with disabilities,” said Brian Jordan, a spokesman.

Despite the timing, INS officials emphasized that the guidelines are not linked to the welfare overhaul. Rather, authorities said, the new rules are a response to a 1994 law directing the INS to provide testing exemptions for citizenship applicants with “physical or developmental disabilities” or “mental impairments.”

The INS has estimated that 300,000 disabled immigrants could apply for exemptions to current requirements that virtually all applicants demonstrate knowledge of English and U.S. history and government. Since 1995, the INS has granted a small number of exemptions on a case-by-case basis.

Disabled rights groups and immigrant advocates have harshly criticized the INS for taking more than two years to develop the new rules, which formally go into effect today.

But INS officials said the time was needed to consult with other government agencies and review more than 200 public comments on proposed rules filed last summer. The INS review process did result in several major modifications that benefit applicants.

In one major change, the INS broadened its definition of mental and physical disabilities from that outlined in its earlier proposal, which was widely criticized as being too restrictive.

In addition, the INS greatly expanded the categories of professionals who may certify applicants as disabled to include licensed medical doctors and clinical psychologists. The earlier proposal limited the list to physicians on an INS-approved roster.

Disability rights advocates have sought to alter the oath requirement for applicants incapable of demonstrating comprehension. Activists suggested allowing guardians or caretakers to attest on behalf of applicants.

In its rules, the INS has directed officers conducting citizenship interviews to accept a “wide variety of signals” from applicants, including “a simple head nod, eye blinking, or other signals specific to the individual that clearly mean ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ ”

Lawyers for the disabled called the wording an important step forward, if not the more sweeping modification of the oath process that they had sought. “I find it tremendously hopeful,” said Melinda Bird, managing attorney of the Southern California office of Protection & Advocacy, a nonprofit agency that represents the disabled.

More than 80 House members, led by Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) called on the INS this week to waive or modify the oath requirements for those with dementia or other mental incapacities. Other moves are afoot in Washington to retain some form of aid for impoverished noncitizens who are aged or disabled.

One proposal is to extend for one or two years the Aug. 22 cutoff date for noncitizens now receiving SSI and food stamps.

The Clinton administration has proposed a package of almost $15 billion in restored benefits for noncitizens who become disabled after arriving in the United States.