An Immigration Policy Muddle

U.S. immigration law has for decades allowed some people who entered the country illegally to eventually become legal permanent residents, usually by virtue of family ties or special job qualifications. And since 1994, such applicants for legal residency (there were 230,000 of them last year) could obtain their so-called green cards without leaving the country. Previously, applicants had to return to their country of origin for weeks, months or even years, breaking up families and disrupting professional lives.

The humane 1994 provision was scheduled to expire Tuesday, and thousands of people feared that they would be deported or that their applications for residency would be voided by their failure to leave the United States. Adding to their anxiety, a Catch-22 clause in the 1996 immigration law said that illegal immigrants who leave the United States and try to return may be barred for up to 10 years, even if they otherwise are eligible for legal status.

Congress belatedly acted Tuesday to calm this troubled situation by adopting a three-week extension of the 1994 provision, known as Section 245 (i), that allows applicants for legal residency to remain in the United States.

The larger job that must be done is to overhaul the morass of confusing and sometimes contradictory U.S. immigration laws, which do not fit together into a coherent policy. The confusion surrounding the status of Central American refugees defined the problem earlier this year, and the current mess over green card applicants does it again.

But an overhaul is for the long term, and in the short term lawmakers should agree on permanent renewal of Section 245 (i). The people covered by it are those who would be considered desirable immigrants. By definition, they have no criminal record, either in the United States or their home country. They are free of chronic or contagious health problems and they offer guarantees they won’t end up on the dole. They have families (many have children who are U.S. citizens) and/or steady jobs. Those applying for legal status must pay a $1,000 fine; most of the $200 million or more a year that they pay is plowed back into immigration enforcement efforts.

Some conservative California Republicans in Congress have expressed their opposition to an extension of Section 245 (i), arguing that it rewards illegal immigrants. We see it as being practical and compassionate. Besides, the major focus in stopping illegal immigration should be on the border and on employers who hire illegal immigrants, including farm labor contractors who recruit low-wage workers inside countries like Mexico.

Deporting people with family ties, jobs and a stake in this country--people who are also on the way to becoming legal residents--does not make sense. That’s true of too much of current immigration policy. The report of a national commission on immigration, issued Tuesday, gives Congress a starting point, and lawmakers should take up the challenge of reform.