Avideh on right.

Avideh Moussavian has been the Director of Immigration Policy and Advocacy at the New York Immigration Coalition, since late 2004. Prior to joining the Coalition, she practiced law in the private sector for four years, where she gained pro bono experience working with and representing asylum seekers.

Avideh said, "Immigrant rights work has been a wonderful way to combine my interests in law and social justice and working with an international community."

Here's Avideh...

Can you explain for readers the latest developments in the illegal immigration debate, and the STRIVE Act? What do you think about the latest developments of the STRIVE Act?
The call for immigration reform is coming from all quarters of the country, and now Congress appears to be serious about responding to this urgent issue and passing a reform bill this year. As important as it is for Congress to pass a reform bill, it is even more important that they pass a truly comprehensive bill that is realistic, workable, and humane.

The STRIVE Act was introduced in the House of Representatives on March 22, 2007 by Congressmen Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ). There are currently 70 co-sponsors. While there are several components of the STRIVE Act that need to be improved—including elimination of the unworkable “touchback� provision and language that threatens community safety by encouraging local enforcement of immigration law—it is a reasonable and comprehensive starting point in the debate over how to repair our dysfunctional immigration system. The STRIVE Act includes a broad and inclusive legalization program, a new worker program that offers future immigrants a path to citizenship, family reunification provisions, and important protections for all workers—immigrant and U.S.-born alike.

Currently, the immigration debate is before the Senate, which has taken a harsh anti-family and anti-worker approach to immigration reform. While the STRIVE Act falls short of our ideal legislation, it is certainly a more reasonable approach than the Senate proposal. While the Senate bill, like the STRIVE Act, includes a broad legalization program, it is completely undermined by provisions that dismantle our family-based immigration system and the creation of a temporary guest worker program that would create a permanent underclass in our society and would jeopardize wages and working conditions for all workers.

What should readers keep in mind when evaluating legislation that is intended for illegal immigrants? What do you consider to be non-negotiables?
The New York Immigration Coalition, along with our partners in national coalitions, promote the following broad principles as part of our platform for immigration reform: an earned path to citizenship for immigrants who are currently in the U.S.; family unity through an accelerated application process and an end to unjust deportations; protections for U.S.-born and immigrant workers alike; and due process and civil rights protections for all.

These are the principles against which we measure any legislation. However, we also have some fundamental bottom lines that are absolute deal breakers. These bottom lines, or non-negotiables, include anything less than our current family immigration system; any guest worker program that does not provide a path to citizenship for all workers; and any significant rollback of current due process rights. We obviously are working to ensure that there are significant improvements to our immigration system that go beyond just meeting our bottom lines, but we also realize how critical it is for us to hold the line with a clear set of public deal breakers so that our lawmakers know that we will reject anything less than this.

How do you feel about the state of immigrants’ rights activism? Is there enough momentum to keep the movement going? And what groups are continuing to lead the movement?
Last year, we witnessed a groundswell of mobilization and the strength of our movement as a grassroots organizing force. There is a tendency, particularly in the media, to measure the immigrant rights movement against those historic events. Grassroots mobilizations are only one aspect of the movement, though, and much of our work involves building political education and leadership in immigrant communities and educating immigrant and non-immigrant communities about specific policies and messages that we need to influence our lawmakers and the American public.

It is also important to recognize that while the current focus is on a historic opportunity for legislative changes in our immigration system, we are also part of a much longer-term movement. Immigrant communities, labor and faith leaders, civil rights and human rights groups and the American public are all important allies and influences in this work, and increasingly people are realizing that our immigration laws affect all of us and cannot be viewed as an issue that affects an isolated, severable part of our community. The immigrant rights movement is addressing tremendously important civil rights and human rights issues that will continue to challenge our nation and our fundamental values not just in 2007 but in future generations as well.

What details do you think are often forgotten about when judging the rights of illegal immigrants in the U.S.? What particular challenges do many women face as immigrants and illegal immigrants?
I think the recent debate on immigration reform has given enormous attention to the important question of how to regularize and integrate the nearly 12 million members of our society who are undocumented. The success of this is legalization for undocumented immigrants has really emerged as a priority issue in the debate.

While legalization is a critical aspect of the debate, we also need to give equal attention to the question of what rights are afforded to all non-citizens, including lawful permanent residents, commonly referred to as green card holders. Many of us are not aware that our government routinely violates due process rights of green card holders and subjects them to the same inhumane treatment as undocumented immigrants, including long periods of incarceration and deportation without due process or access to counsel. Fundamental rights, like the opportunity to be heard by a judge and have your fair day in court, or protection against double jeopardy, are frequently violated without recourse.

Many immigrants, including women, face additional challenges. For example, women, who are already more likely to be subjected to unfair wages, are even more likely to be exploited in the workplace if they are undocumented. Women are also vulnerable to serious health and safety risks due to fear of accessing medical assistance, including pre- and post-natal care, and fear of reporting incidents of abuse to law enforcement.

From your work with immigrants, what is the top reason why people immigrate to the U.S. illegally?
The United States has historically been known as the land of opportunity. This is just as true for many of our ancestors who came here generations ago as it is for newly arriving immigrants. The possibility of a better future for the next generation of our families has been a hallmark aspect of our immigration system. Of course, there are many immigrants who come here as refugees or seeking safe haven when fleeing persecution in their home countries, but economic opportunity is the driving force for most immigrants who come to the United States.

While this country offers a great deal to immigrants, we also have a responsibility to examine conditions in other countries, particularly those from which the U.S. is receiving large numbers of immigrants. As much as it is the responsibility of the United States government to reform our immigration laws in a way that respects and integrates immigrants, we also need to reform our policies and practices that devastate the economic and social conditions in other countries and drive immigrants into the U.S. who feel compelled to live, work, contribute, and earn their livelihood here in order to survive.

Do you know the percentage of immigrants who immigrate to the U.S. illegally? And how does it compare to past historical contexts of illegal immigration to the U.S.?
There is a tendency to romanticize past generations of immigrants as people who came here speaking fluent English and following every aspect of the letter of our immigration laws. The reality is that every wave of immigrants has always included those who did not have any legal door through which they could enter.

Today, we have nearly 12 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S. Approximately 60% of the undocumented population came through a border without permission from the government, and the other 40% came originally on some type of visa which has expired. While there are certain economic and political conditions that have driven a recent wave of immigrants, this is not a unique period in the history of immigration in this country.

Where do presidential contenders Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama fall on your scale of pro-immigrants’ rights?
Senator Clinton has shown support for certain issues in the immigration debate, including support for the DREAM Act (legislation that would offer young people who have grown up in the U.S. without status a chance to earn citizenship and access higher education) and support for uniting families by accelerating the application process for green cards, but she has also supported anti-immigrant legislation like the Secure Fence Act of 2006. As a leader of an immigrant state and someone with national influence, she has the responsibility to speak more publicly—and to immigrant audiences—about her position on immigration reform and to play a stronger leadership role among her Senate colleagues.

Senator Obama also supported the Secure Fence Act of 2006, but he has also expressed support for policies that unite families and that eliminate barriers, including prohibitively expensive application fees to naturalization. Like Senator Clinton, he is a leader in a state with a large immigrant population, and both Senators should be promoting pro-immigrant policies as a winning issue for the Democratic Party.

Unfortunately, partisan politics often obstruct the serious debate and passage of effective policies. Many members of Congress would prefer to sit out this complex and emotional debate and avoid taking a position, but the reality is that this issue and the urgent need to reform our dysfunctional immigration laws are not going away. The next two months will be critical in revealing whether Congress is more interested in partisan finger-pointing or in seriously addressing a growing humanitarian crisis in our communities.

1 Comments

June 4, 2007 4:03 PM

[0+|0-]  roro80 said:

Thanks so much for this interview, and thanks to Avideh for her work in this area. Immigration policy is something that I think the progressive and feminist communities need to be looking at with a closer eye. As Avideh points out, unjust immigration policy constitutes civil liberties violations for millions, and any time civil liberties are taken away from large groups of people, the hardest hit will be women, children, and families.

I  Liked | Disliked  Liked Disliked this comment  |  Reply |

Leave a comment

Comments (You may use HTML tags for style)