Republicans and These 61 Democrats Want to Deport Domestic Violence Survivors Who Try to Defend Themselves.
Earlier today, the Republican-controlled House voted for their latest fear-mongering attack on immigrants and due process.
The bill — called the Preventing Violence Against Women by Illegal Aliens Act — does not do what its fear-mongering title suggests. Indeed, there is no reason to believe that the party that is putting a serial rapist back into the White House has any concern about violence against women.
The bill expands the grounds for inadmissibility for noncitizen migrants who are convicted of, admit to having committed, or admit committing acts that constitute the essential elements of a sex offense and establishes a new ground of inadmissibility for domestic violence related offenses. So what does this actually mean?
In part, this duplicates existing law. As Minority Whip Katherine Clark explains, “Noncitizen migrants convicted of an aggravated felony, including sexual offenses, are already deportable, and those who are convicted of or admit to committing the essential elements of a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude (CIMT) are likewise already deportable so this does not close a loophole in current law.”
So what does it do then? The bill’s language around domestic violence is so poorly drafted that it would result in survivors of domestic violence being deported for defending themselves and put those who are accused of violence by their abuser and are unable to defend themselves in court or plead guilty to avoid a drawn-out court process at risk of deportation.
That’s why 200 national and local organizations participating in the National Taskforce to End Sexual and Domestic Violence oppose the bill. From their letter to Congress in opposition to HR30:
Language and cultural barriers, fear of the abuser and the authorities, confusion, intimidation, a lack of awareness of rights, and a lack of access to advocates and other resources, all may prevent an immigrant victim from being able to communicate what really happened. Once in custody and/or facing trial, and desperate to be released and reunited with their children, these same factors — combined with poor legal counsel, particularly about the immigration consequences of criminal pleas and convictions — could lead to ineligibility for status, or the deportation of wrongly accused victims who may have pled to or been unfairly convicted of domestic violence charges.
Likewise opposed is the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights:
H.R. 30 is problematic in that it calls for immigration enforcement measures against people who have not actually been convicted in a court of any particular crime. As a general matter, any such policy would contravene the nation’s most basic notions of due process, and would greatly increase the risk of abusive and discriminatory enforcement.
Judiciary Chair Jamie Raskin strongly opposed the bill and encouraged Democrats to do so as well. More should have listened.
Although a majority of Democrats voted no (145), 61 Democrats still joined every present Republican in voting for this shameful bill.
Here are the 61:
19 Democrats who voted against the Laken Riley Act voted for this: Jim Clyburn (SC-06), Herb Conaway (NJ-03), Jim Himes (CT-04), Chrissy Houlahan (PA-06), Julie Johnson (TX-32), Tim Kennedy (NY-26), Ro Khanna (CA-17), Seth Magaziner (RI-02), Sarah McBride (DE-AL), Kelly Morrison (MN-03), Jimmy Panetta (CA-19), Pat Ryan (NY-18), Andrea Salinas (OR-06), Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11), Darren Soto (FL-09), Eric Swalwell (CA-14), Lori Trahan (MA-03), Gabe Vasquez (NM-02), and Eugene Vindman (VA-07).
Six Democrats who shamefully voted for the Laken Riley Act voted against this bill: Jim Costa (CA-21), Chris Deluzio (PA-17), Val Hoyle (OR-04), Lucy McBath (GA-07), David Min (CA-47), and Joe Morelle (NY-25).
With Republicans in full control in DC, this isn’t just a shameful messaging bill. It will likely be a successful effort to cause harm. Democrats should stop going along.
