As prospects for meaningful immigration reform remain uncertain in the House of Representatives, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has found that reason and compassion can prevail over the madness that often permeates American immigration laws. Today that Court issued Akram v. Holder, a decision that interprets the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to permit children who enter the United States on K-4 visas—meaning they are the children of spouses of U.S. citizens—to secure permanent status in the United States based on the marriage between their parent and the citizen spouse. Writing for the court, Judge Michael Kanne explained, “This case demonstrates both the INA’s tangled construction and its tender heart.”
The issues involved in the case are complex: a K-4 visa was issued to a young woman who was over the age of 18, but under 21, when her mother married her stepfather. By law, she was the minor daughter of her mother, but not the stepchild of her stepfather because she was not under 18 when he and her mother married. According to immigration regulations and a published decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals, she was not allowed to seek permanent residence because a K-4 recipient could only do so based on a petition filed by the citizen stepparent. And, confusingly enough, Ms. Akram did not have a citizen stepparent because of her age at the time of her mother’s marriage. As such, after entering the United States on her K-4 visa, she was expected to separate from her mother and younger sister (who were able to secure permanent residency) and return to Pakistan on her own.
The Seventh Circuit agreed with Ms. Akram—who was represented by pro bono lawyers at Jones Day and the National Immigrant Justice Center—that this outcome was absurd and ran afoul of congressional intent. Judge Kanne wondered, “[W]hy would Congress endorse the result in this case? Why admit a class of people into the country—using a visa designed to reunite families— only to give them the boot after a few years?” Indeed, the court determined, that could not be the case. As Judge Kanne noted, our immigration laws have “the potential to bring families together to share in the American dream.”
The importance of family unity is not complicated, nor is the benefit of allowing children to remain with their parents. Today, the Seventh Circuit recognized that Congress meant to protect families when it amended this provision of the INA years ago. Let’s hope the House of Representatives is reminded of this virtue and prompted to dispense with political posturing and pass true immigration reform.
Lisa Koop is a managing attorney at Heartland Alliance’s National Immigrant Justice Center.
Rethink Immigration is a blog series in which National Immigrant Justice Center staff, clients, and volunteers share their unique perspectives and specific recommendations on what Congress and the Obama administration must include in comprehensive immigration reform to create an inclusive, fair, and humane immigration system.
Photo Credit: Sam Caplat via Creative Commons