April 23, 2014

Immigration Reform Highlights from the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Hearing

The once illusive and ambitious ideal that was Comprehensive Immigration Reform (“CIR”) has been steadily making its way toward reality. Beginning with the bi-partisan framework recently introduced by the “Gang of Eight,” CIR is becoming more and more tangible. On February 13, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing on immigration reform. Among the witnesses before the Committee were Department of Homeland (“DHS”) Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Jose Antonio Vargas, Founder of Define American, Jessica Vaughan, Director of Policy Studies of the Center for Immigration Studies, Chris Crane, President of the National ICE Council #118, and Janet Murguía, President and CEO of the National Council of La Raza. Although still in the very beginning stages, there were some key highlights from the hearing that are good indicators of the direction in which CIR is headed.

Of these highlights, two of the most contentious topics, the so-called “path to citizenship” for the 11 million undocumented immigrants already in the U.S. and border security were addressed. The takeaway from this discussion was that it is not possible, nor is it desirable, to attempt to remove 11 million people from the U.S. Nevertheless, the word “amnesty” is still taboo, as the proposed reform will necessarily require immigrants to meet certain conditions before they are able to earn a path to citizenship. Border security goes hand-in-hand with the path to citizenship. Secretary Napolitano emphasized that a path to citizenship would allow DHS to better focus its resources on real security threats. Trying to make our borders 100% impermeable is simply unrealistic, and DHS will be more successful if able to focus more resources on the inside—such as through reducing incentives to illegal immigration through higher employer sanctions and effective work verification.

Other highlights from the hearing include making family reunification and entrepreneurship top priorities. Additionally, and possibly most importantly, the hearing heralded a discussion on the importance of comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, reform, as well as reframing the immigration debate as an “opportunity” rather than a “problem.” This change in outlook and attitude, although simple, is sure to be a significant step in the right direction.

A webcast of the hearing is available on the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary website. 

©2002-2013 Fowler White Boggs P.A. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

About the Author


Jennifer G. Roeper practices in the Firm’s Tampa office in the International and Immigration Practice Group.  Ms. Roeper concentrates her practice in the area of immigration, and handles all aspects of immigration law including temporary visa processing, applications for permanent residence and naturalization.  She assists corporate clients in maintaining compliance with U.S. immigration laws, and serves as counsel for clients facing deportation from the United States. 


Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.