Skip to main content

While the Maryland ballot initiative on education is great for young migrants in that state, it highlights the fact that federal action is sorely needed to protect the human rights and dignity of migrants everywhere.

Written by Marianne Møllman for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.

November 6th was a good day for human rights, at least in Maryland. Not only did the state's voters support same-sex marriage, they also voted in favor of expanding access to higher education for all of Maryland's students, regardless of their immigration status.

While the Maryland ballot initiative on education is great for young migrants in that state, it highlights the fact that federal action is sorely needed to protect the human rights and dignity of migrants everywhere.  

There is some good news. In June this year, President Obama signed an executive order preventing the Department of Homeland Security from deporting undocumented immigrants under 30 who came to the United States before they were 16 years old, and who fulfill a number of other criteria regarding their moral standing and education.

However, while this change rightly was hailed as a positive development for hundreds of thousands of young people, it does not overcome the need for legislative action -- President Obama himself called it a "stop-gap" measure. In fact, it is now more than decade since a bipartisan initiative proposing similar benefits first was introduced in the Senate under the title "Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act."

The idea behind the original bill -- and the various versions of it introduced over the years -- was to open the possibility for higher education and ultimately citizenship for noncitizen children of good moral character, regardless of their immigration status.

And the idea is solid. The individuals potentially covered by these bills are already a positive part of their communities, and many know no other home than the United States. They are, for all intents and purposes, Americans in everything but paperwork. Moreover, maintaining the documentary limbo many of them are in does nothing but make it more difficult for them to pay tax, improve their education, or otherwise contribute constructively to society. In other words: refusing to regularize the status of undocumented children risks turning them into the pariahs they never were.

However, since the first DREAM Act was introduced in 2001, and despite the passage of a version of the bill in the House of Representatives in 2010, no final legislation has been approved by both houses. Arguments that the bill would foster illegal immigration or potentially shield gang members do not bear out in reality. For starters, the bill explicitly seeks to exclude those with a criminal background and applies equally to documented and undocumented aliens. Also, from a pragmatic perspective, most people migrate because they can't provide for their families at home, not because they think they can "pull one over" on their host country. The lack of DREAM Act-like legislation does not make foreign-born children magically disappear or "self-deport." Rather, it prevents them from fulfilling their potential as participants in society, thus becoming more of a burden than they otherwise would have been: a lose-lose situation if ever there was one.

But even more importantly, education is a human right. Numerous international human rights bodies have repeatedly clarified that states must protect the human rights of those living in their territory, regardless of their legal status. Certainly, states can and must independently determine their immigration and access policies, but they cannot decide whether any one individual has rights: we all do.

Up until this week, 11 states had already adopted their own versions of the DREAM Act, including California, Texas, and New York, all states with large and rapidly growing foreign-born populations. It is telling that states with large immigrant populations know that providing immigrant children with access to higher education only can be beneficial to everyone.

The ballot initiative approved in Maryland this week sends a powerful message to Congress that states are willing to provide, piecemeal, what the federal government should be providing, wholesale. It also underlines the uneven nature of legal protections for immigrants until federal law is passed, especially because immigration generally remains under federal purview. Hopefully, passing a federal DREAM Act is a priority item on the agenda of the new Congress.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I think that one really positive thing that will (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fleet, VClib

    happen as a result of this election is that there were be a deal on comprehensive immigration reform.  Like every deal when there is divided government, neither side will get everything it wants (so I don't expect the version of the Dream Act that passed in the then-Democratic House to be the final version, for example) but I am seeing Republicans move on the idea that they should support a bill that addresses immigration in a more comprehensive way and not just focus on walls, fences, and "self-deportation."  

    •  I'm still skeptical about the chances of CIR (0+ / 0-)

      The GOP has its "red lines" when it comes to this issue, but so do Dems.

      Most of the people here that post with any regularity on this subject are quick to attack virtually any policy suggestion that imposes an impediment for undocumented immigrants.

      E-verify is regularly dismissed as undependable and burdensome, for example.  The Dems, I'm pretty sure, will insist upon something along the lines of a waiver for any employer with less than, to pick a number, 100 employees from having to do E-Verify, which is a pretty gaping hole.

      Both Parties are, IMO, largely pandering to key constituencies when the speak to this issue, and both would be happy to continue to do so without actually changing a thing.

      Oregon:'s cold. But it's a damp cold.

      by Keith930 on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 09:24:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I can't imagine a deal that has no restrictions (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        nextstep, Keith930

        or impediments for undocumented immigrants.  I don't think the country as a whole is there.  I know people at this site are, but people at this site sometimes forget that they are generally to the left of the country as a whole -- many people here, for example, think that most Democrats are not progressive enough.  

        The very far left -- those who want no restrictions whatsoever on undocumented immigrants -- are going to have to compromise, just as those on the very far right -- who want nothing but walls, fences, and deportation -- are going to have to compromise.  The country as a whole is not with either of them.  

  •  Economically, morally and politically (0+ / 0-)

    As our diarist RH Reality check says, .... well, allow me to paraphrase, summarize and pile on.

    Economically, the DREAM Act is a good thing for all.   Educated members of society are better for all.   We need each member of society to be at their best.    .... (insert other aspects of society...   driver's licenses, Social Security, )

    Morally, I want the immigrants to not feel like second class citizens.    Its bad enough that some Democrats are treated as second class (or worse) because of some Obama yard signs.   I would ask my Republican friends to remember what it was like when at some point in their life they were treated worse than dirt.

    Politically, the implications of demographics changes are sinking in.   Some conservatives are grudgingly adapting.   (My small town is one.)

    One way or another of the 3 broad categories, we of DKos can be ready to engage Republican moderates.  

  •  Orrin Hatch used to sponsor it (0+ / 0-)

    There's a reason why Orrin Hatch used to co-sponsor the Dream Act.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site