Faith-based Refugee Groups Oppose Sensenbrenner Bill
Episcopal News Service. February 8, 2005 [020805-1]
A bill that would severely limit the access refugees have to asylum in the United States faces strong opposition from faith-based agencies that work with threatened immigrants on a daily basis.
The REAL ID Act, proposed by Congressman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), would tighten the requirements for asylum-seekers to prove they are being persecuted in their home country while giving judges more discretion in evaluating whether the evidence of such persecution is sufficient.
"The current asylum system works well in preventing those who would abuse the system or contemplate terrorist acts from gaining asylum. No terrorist has penetrated the system and there are in place sufficient safeguards to see that this does not occur," said Richard Parkins, director of Episcopal Migration Ministries. "To assert that a more restrictive asylum system is a critical part of an enhanced security system is to misinform the public and unfairly tie our asylum system to the issue of terrorism. Fear-based legislation without foundation in fact should not be allowed to pass."
According to an analysis by the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the bill, introduced by Sensenbrenner on January 26:
* Raises the standard for asylum and withholding eligibility and requires all applicants to prove that a "central reason" for their persecution was one of the enumerated grounds (race, religion, national origin, political opinion, or social group);
* Allows judges to require credible asylum and withholding applicants to obtain corroborating evidence "unless the applicant does not have the evidence or cannot obtain the evidence without leaving the country" and effectively bars judicial reversal of determinations regarding the availability of corroborating evidence;
* Authorizes credibility determinations to be based on demeanor or the consistency of an applicant's written or oral statements made at any time to any individual and whether or not under oath;
* Bars any court from review of any discretionary judgments, decisions, or actions, regardless of whether made in the context of removal proceedings; and
* Repeals the provision enacted in the intelligence reform legislation mandating a study of vulnerabilities in our asylum system.
Sensenbrenner attempted to attach a series of similar anti-immigrant provisions to the Intelligence Reform legislation passed in the closing hours of the last Congress, but his efforts failed. At that time, members of the Episcopal Church's Standing Commission on Anglican and International Peace with Justice Concerns signed a letter to Congress expressing opposition to the measures.
Of particular concern to critics of the bill, and especially the religious community, is the impact a more restrictive system would have on legitimate asylum claims based on religious persecution. "It is a matter of special concern to many of us in the faith-based world that those seeking asylum for religious reasons would confront additional, unreasonable barriers to pressing their claims," noted Parkins.
The problem relates to the much higher standard of evidence that would be required of asylum applicants under the proposed law. Given the circumstances of asylum seekers, Parkins said, getting evidence beyond what is now required or trying to involve family members back home in garnering evidence is "highly problematic and, for those in detention, nearly impossible."
Moreover, under the proposed changes, those seeking asylum would have to convince immigration authorities that the "exclusive, single motive" of a persecutor was one of the universally acknowledged conditions for granting asylum. "Given the many circumstances which may surround a case of persecution, asking the victim to demonstrate to a reviewer's satisfaction that religion, membership in a social group, one's race or nationality, or political opinion was the overriding motive of the persecutor is a standard which many asylum seekers could not reasonably be expected to meet," said Parkins. "All of these new devices which impede a grant of asylum to an otherwise legitimate claimant are unnecessary intrusions into a system which already addresses the security issue. The new law makes asylum a more remote, if not unreachable, option for real victims of persecution."
Episcopal Migration Ministries has been joined by 18 other interfaith groups in opposing the legislation.
Text of the interfaith statement:
Interfaith Statement
February 3, 2005
REAL ID Act Threatens Ability of Victims of Persecution to Find Save Haven in the United States
As representatives of various faith traditions, we are deeply concerned that the REAL ID Act, legislation proposed by Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), would make asylum a more remote possibility for hundreds of persons who need protection. We understand that safeguarding our national security is an urgent issue, and we support measures that honor that concern. We also subscribe to core beliefs which require that we provide safety to victims of persecution, particularly those who have no recourse to the protection that democratic societies traditionally provide. Restricting access to asylum beyond current practice does not serve the cause of national security and, moreover, erodes a sacred and legal responsibility to give safety to those whose only protection comes from asylum.
Each of our traditions has witnessed the suffering of persons whose beliefs often place them in jeopardy and possibly in mortal danger. As American-based faith communities, we have cherished the ability of asylum seekers to find safety in communities around our nation. We are, therefore, saddened by a further erosion of our asylum system under the pretext of national security. We urge Members of Congress to reject the notion that all asylees are prospective terrorists and that the current system needs to be made more restrictive.
The belief that we must receive persons who have been rejected and persecuted because of their ideas and religious practices is anchored in both our histories and sacred texts. We have contributed over the years to supporting and enriching practices which embrace hospitality as not only a religious but an American value. We also appreciate the need to prevent terrorism from violating both our freedom and safety. We believe that hospitality to the stranger - particularly one who has been persecuted - and security are compatible national goals. We, therefore, reject legislation that subverts hospitality in the name of security.
The current asylum system includes rigorous safeguards against terrorists abusing the asylum system. The changes proposed by the REAL ID Act raise a false issue in further victimizing legitimate asylum seekers. Requiring unreasonable levels of evidence to prove an asylum claim, placing a greater burden on asylum seekers to convince reviewers of the key motivation of their accusers, and allowing subjective considerations to guide the review process all send a chilling message to those who desperately seek the safety and protection which they have a right to expect of our great nation.
We have all seen how fear can pervert justice. We believe that the religious traditions which we embrace calls us to oppose a narrowing of the door to asylum by some of the world's most at risk persons. We are committed to resisting a fear driven agenda which violates our faith based principles.
* Anti-Defamation League
* B'nai B'rith International
* Church World Service
* Episcopal Migration Ministries
* HIAS and Council Migration Service of Philadelphia
* Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society
* Institute on Religion and Public Policy
* Jesuit Refugee Service
* Jewish Council for Public Affairs
* Jewish Labor Committee
* Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service
* Midland Alliances
* Midland Association of Churches
* Midland Ministerial Alliance
* National Council of Jewish Women
* Project for International Religious Liberty
* Religious Freedom Coalition
* Workmen's Circle/ Arbeter Ring
* World Relief