Sign Up for email alerts



Uniting American Families Act

H.R. 2221 / S.1328

Background
Under the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act, U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses (and other immediate family members) for immigration purposes. But same-sex partners of U.S. citizens and permanent residents are not considered "spouses" and their partners cannot sponsor them for family-based immigration. Consequently, many same-sex bi-national couples are kept apart or torn apart. And since immigration is regulated on a federal level, even bi-national couples who have entered into marriages, civil unions or other legally recognized relationships in their home states still cannot sponsor their spouses for immigration purposes. The Uniting American Families Act (formerly the Permanent Partners Immigration Act) would help to remedy this injustice.

Approximately 75 percent of the 1 million green cards or immigrant visas are issued to family members of U.S. citizens and permanent residents. However, the Immigration and Nationality Act's current definition of family does not include same-sex partners. Therefore, thousands of same-sex couples are separated or live in constant fear of being stopped by officials who demand to see documentation and threaten detention. In some cases, same-sex partners face prosecution by the Immigration and Naturalization Service — including hefty fines and deportations. U.S. citizens are sometimes left with no other choice but to immigrate with their partners to a country with more fair-minded immigration laws.


Hospitable Laws in other Nations
The United States lags behind the following 22 countries that recognize same-sex couples for immigration purposes: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. 

One of the fundamental principles of immigration law and policy is the notion of family unification, which allows U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents to sponsor their spouses (and other family members) for immigration purposes. Unfortunately, same-sex couples committed to spending their lives together are not recognized as "families" under current federal law, including the U.S. immigration law. 


How Will the Measure Work?
Once the measure is enacted, bi-national same-sex couples will have to meet the same requirements as bi-national, married couples. Some requirements include providing proof of the relationship — including affidavits from friends and family or evidence of financial support.

The UAFA will apply the same standards to same-sex couples that the United States applies to opposite-sex couples where one member is seeking to bring a foreign partner into the country. As with current immigration laws for married couples, the UAFA would impose harsh penalties for fraud, including up to five years in prison and as much as $250,000 in fines. In addition, if the partnership is dissolved in less than two years, the legal immigrant status of the partner would be revoked.

Under the measure, a permanent partner is any person 18 or older who is: 

  • in a committed, intimate relationship with another adult 18 or older in which both parties intend a lifelong commitment;
  • financially interdependent with that other person;
  •  not married to, or in a permanent partnership with, anyone other than that other person; and
  • unable to contract with that person a marriage cognizable under the Immigration and Nationality Act.


What is the Current Status of the Bill?
UAFA was introduced in the 110th Congress in both houses of Congress on May 8, 2007.  The House bill (H.R. 2221) is sponsored by Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).  Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) introduced the Senate version of the bill (S. 1328) on the same date.

Bill Text

 

Related Pages

 

Other Organizations that Support UAFA

 


For more information, please contact legislation@hrc.org.


The legal information provided on this page is provided as a courtesy to the public. It is not designed to serve as legal advice. HRC does not warrant that this information is current or comprehensive.

Last Updated: 6/6/2008