American Families United Act

The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRAIRA), signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 30, 1996, made major changes to the Immigration and Nationality Act, shaping the current framework of U.S. immigration policy.{{Cite web |title=H.R. 3610 |url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-bill/3610/all-actions |access-date=31 March 2025 |website=Congress.gov|date=30 September 1996 }}

One significant byproduct of IIRIRA was the establishment of admissibility bars, which prevent certain immigrants from legally reentering the U.S. for extended periods—sometimes even permanently.{{Cite web |title=Immigration Bars |url=https://www.fwd.us/news/immigration-bars/ |access-date=5 April 2025 |website=fwd.us|date=20 March 2025 }}

Immigrants who enter the U.S. without authorization (as opposed to overstaying a visa) and later marry a U.S. citizen are unable to adjust their status while in the country. Instead, they must leave and undergo consular processing at a U.S. embassy or consulate in their home country. However, departing the U.S. triggers admissibility bars, preventing reentry for a specified period, often three or ten years. In some cases, a permanent bar may be imposed, making it impossible for the immigrant to return legally.

Waivers for inadmissibility are available in limited scenarios but are subject to strictly narrow eligibility criteria. Some waivers may be granted if the inadmissibility results in "extreme hardship" to a U.S. citizen (or sometimes a lawful permanent resident). However, the burden of proof lies on the applicant and their family to demonstrate that extreme hardship will occur. Notably, family separation alone is not considered a sufficient reason to meet the high standard for these waivers, even when involving a U.S. citizen.

Additionally, waiver applications can be significantly delayed due to bureaucratic backlogs. For example, as of April 4th, 2025, USCIS reports the processing time for a Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver (Form I-601A) at 37 months.{{Cite web |title=USCIS Processing Times |url=https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/ |access-date=5 April 2025 |website=USCIS.gov}} Backlogs have become so extreme that an increasing number of families have turned to suing USICS in federal court to force the agency to adjudicate their waiver applications. The number of such suits, as tracked by the Syracuse University research group Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, suggests strain on the federal judiciary.{{Cite web |date=2023-05-18 |title=New data shows immigration-related lawsuits are on the rise |url=https://www.kjzz.org/2023-05-18/content-1847203-new-data-shows-immigration-related-lawsuits-are-rise-civil-federal-court |access-date=2025-04-06 |website=KJZZ |language=en}}

In a 1998 press relese, The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) wrote:

IIRAIRA contains many provisions that strip the courts of any authority to review the decision of the INS. Under IIRAIRA, virtually all discretionary decisions affording relief to eligible individuals are no longer reviewable by a court. This 'court-stripping' is unprecedented and unconstitutional. Judicial review of individual decisions by INS officers and of INS procedures and applications should be restored in order to protect against mistake and abuse.{{Cite web |title=AILA Press Release on IIRAIRA Reform |url=https://www.aila.org/library/aila-press-release-on-iiraira-reform |access-date=2025-04-06 |website=www.aila.org}}

Consular processing—the process by which a foreign national applies for a U.S. immigrant visa at a U.S. embassy or consulate in their home country to become a permanent resident—is often the cause of family separation for U.S. citizens. When a non-citizen spouse goes through consular processing and reaches their interview by a U.S. State Department official, they may face new, or even incorrect, charges of inadmissibility and wrongful visa denials.{{Cite web |title=Introduction to Consular Processing |url=https://www.ilrc.org/sites/default/files/resources/introduction_to_consular_processing83.pdf |access-date=5 April 2025 |website=ilrc.org}}

The [https://consularaccountability.org/ Consular Accountability Project], which describes itself as “a legal defense organization fighting for accountability and oversight of the consular process," states:

Each year, consular officers with highly variable degrees of experience make decisions that forever alter the course of millions of lives. Though decisions are commonly erroneous and arbitrary, the executive branch asserts that the consular process is exempt from the basic constitutional protections that apply in all other areas of law. Too often, interviews at consulates are treated as interrogations where the suspect has no Miranda rights. Accountability in the consular process is critical to protect the rights of mixed-status families and prevent executive branch abuse.{{Cite web |title=Consular Accountability Project |url=https://consularaccountability.org/ |access-date=2025-04-06 |website=consularaccountability.org |language=en}}

To understand how dangerous this doctrine is, imagine yourself in the following situation: You’re a US citizen with an undocumented spouse who has applied for a green card. Everything is going smoothly, your spouse appears eligible, and as the last step in the process, they fly to their home country for an interview at the US consulate. Instead of coming home with a green card as expected, the State Department tells your spouse they cannot return to the US at all. The State Department doesn’t give a reason, they simply say your spouse might engage in unlawful activity if allowed back into the US. You ask for clarification and receive none, and because you do not know the reason for the denial, you have no way to disprove it. What can you do to unite your family and bring your spouse back home? Most Americans will respond instinctively: 'I have the right to my day in court.' But according to the doctrine of consular non-reviewability, you don’t.{{Cite web |title=Why Everyone Should Care About the "Doctrine of Consular Nonreviewability" |url=https://www.aila.org/blog/why-everyone-should-care-about-the-doctrine-of-consular-nonreviewability |access-date=2025-04-06 |website=www.aila.org}}

Cancellation of removal is an existing form of legal immigration relief available to spouses and children of United States citizens. However, this provision is insufficient to address the needs of the broader constituency of U.S. citizens in mixed-status marriages.

• Cancellation of removal is only available to an immigrant in removal proceedings, not to those filing affirmative applications or denied abroad at consular processing.
• One of several eligibility requirements of cancellation of removal is that "removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to the alien's spouse, parent, or child, who is a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence."INA § 240A(b), {{uscsub|8|1229b|b}} ("Cancellation of removal and adjustment of status for certain nonpermanent residents").
• It can be claimed (and has been) that this standard is probably the highest and most difficult standard that exists in U.S. law—even surpassing the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard the government must meet in criminal cases.{{Cite book |last=Meyers |first=Robert S. |title=Conducting Psychological Assessments for U. S. Immigration Cases |date=2020 |publisher=Springer International Publishing AG |isbn=978-3-030-49868-9 |location=Cham}}
• Grants of cancellation of removal are statutorily limited to 4,000 per year, meaning they are adjudicated only after years-long waits. If, theoretically, every single one of the 1.2 million undocumented spouses currently married to U.S. citizens were to mount winning cancellation of removal defenses, it would take 300 years to award all such grants of relief.{{Cite web |title=EOIR Cancellation of removal flyer |url=https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1596141/dl?inline |access-date=5 April 2025 |website=justice.gov}}

U and T visa holders, who are victims of crime and human trafficking respectively, have access to waivers of inadmissibility that allow more grounds of inadmissibility to be waived with greater discretion. However, such relief is not available to spouses and children of U.S. citizens, even though they often face similar barriers to adjustment.[https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/u-and-t-visas U and T Visa]. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

A fifth-generation Kansan and chemical engineer was forced to relocate his family to Canada. His wife, a Mexican citizen, was permanently barred from immigrating to the U.S. after a brief, decades-old encounter at the Texas border. As a 19-year-old, she attempted to cross with friends using just a driver’s license, as was allowed at the time. When asked by a border agent if she was a U.S. citizen, she misunderstood the question in English and answered yes. The agent switched to Spanish, and she immediately corrected herself, stating she was Mexican. She was fined $10 for misrepresentation and returned to Mexico—but that moment triggered a lifetime admissibility bar. The American Families United Act would allow the family a chance to request the bar be waived, possibly allowing them to live together in Kansas.{{Cite news |last=Bryan |first=Matthew |date=20 June 2023 |title=Trapped in Canada: Kansas native wants to bring family home, but the system says no |url=https://www.kansas.com/article276513416.html |access-date=10 April 2025 |work=The Wichita Eagle}}

A married U.S. citizen medical doctor was blindsided when she learned her immigrant husband was permanently barred during his consular processing interview in Mexico. At the time, she was completing her medical residency in Cincinnati, Ohio. Faced with the news, she chose to live apart from her husband until she finished her training. She later moved to Mexico to maintain family unity. The doctor shared:

The difficult decisions have continued. Turning down dream job offers, leaving my country to keep our family together, giving birth to our children in a foreign country, and missing countless holidays and family events. I’m facing living apart from my aging parents and never being able to pursue our dreams together as a family because of these outdated and ineffective immigration bars. My husband is a kind, hardworking man who received a permanent bar for just having helped his family. We should not be punished for the rest of our lives for that.

An Alabama-born delivery driver and evangelical Christian, now living in Atlanta, Georgia, married a Mexican national who faces a permanent bar due to multiple, decades-old unauthorized entries into the United States. Acting on misguided legal counsel, the couple believed that voluntary departure would lead to an expedited path home. Only after self-deporting to Mexico did the family learn that the permanent bar applied, leaving them separated indefinitely. During this time, their young U.S. citizen son was diagnosed with a cancerous kidney tumor and underwent surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy—all without his mother by his side.{{Cite web |date=2024-04-23 |title=Family fighting to reunite with self-deported mom meets with lawmakers in DC |url=https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/family-fighting-reunite-with-self-deported-mom-meets-with-lawmakers-dc/UG7USIMDFFGHTELGIGV2X7PJGM/ |access-date=2025-04-11 |website=KIRO 7 News Seattle |language=en}}{{Cite web |date=2019-05-26 |title=He voted for Trump. Now he and his wife raise their son from opposite sides of the border - Los Angeles Times |website=Los Angeles Times |url=https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-trump-voter-immigration-family-separation-georgia-20190519-htmlstory.html |access-date=2025-04-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190526154934/https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-trump-voter-immigration-family-separation-georgia-20190519-htmlstory.html |archive-date=26 May 2019 }}

A U.S. Navy veteran and native of Colorado was forced into exile in Canada to remain with his wife, a Mexican national. Years earlier, after living in the United States with her two children and their father (from a previous marriage), she left the country to seek medical care abroad for her son's severe allergies. Although she held a valid visa to return, immigration officials denied her entry, suspecting she might overstay. Facing that denial, she crossed the border without inspection in order to remain united as a nuclear family in the United States. This act triggered a ten-year bar on reentry—one that could not be waived, even after she married a U.S. citizen and built a life with him spanning more than two decades. Rather than live in the United States without legal protections for his wife, the veteran chose to relocate with his family to Canada. In 2023, the veteran wrote:

'But you’re a citizen! When you get married, doesn’t your wife become a citizen, too?' It’s a common misconception, even held by some legislators who ought to know better.

My wife is not a criminal nor a security threat to the U.S. Until we were forced by my government to abandon my home country to remain together as a nuclear family, my wife was a member of our foothills community. She was a cafeteria assistant at Rooney Ranch Elementary, an active sports mom, a nursery aide in our Applewood Valley United Methodist Church, a helpful neighbor, and beloved by members of these communities.{{Cite web |date=2023-04-19 |title=Immigration law prevents family from staying together in U.S., but there's a bipartisan solution |url=https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2023/04/19/immigration-law-solution |access-date=2025-04-11 |website=www.wbur.org |language=en}}{{Cite web |last=Markowitz |first=Ed |title=Opinion: I'm a Veteran Exiled to Canada to Keep My Family United |url=https://www.westword.com/news/opinion-a-colorado-veteran-exiled-to-canada-to-keep-family-united-18137060 |access-date=2025-04-11 |website=Westword |language=en}}

A Department of Homeland Security employee and U.S. citizen in Nevada was forced to divorce her husband, an undocumented immigrant, to protect her job. The couple had been married for years, raised two children, and bought a home. But when a required background check asked for his Social Security number—which he didn’t have—she faced losing her livelihood. They had tried to adjust his status, but he was issued a 10-year bar for prior unlawful presence. The divorce, made out of necessity, caused lasting emotional strain.

A former public school teacher from Philadelphia owns a commercial and residential construction with her husband, an undocumented Brazilian man. Despite being married for over twenty years, their only options are to live without legal status together in the United States or face a ten-year exile abroad. Together, they have three adult U.S. citizen children. In a 2024 economic briefing sponsored by the [https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=american+business+immigration+coalition American Business Immigration Coalition (ABIC)] and U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, the Pennsylvanian criticized the Biden administration for disparities between the treatment of newly-paroled immigrants and long-established mixed-status families.{{Cite web |date=16 April 2024 |title=American Business Immigration Coalition |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52Agh6Bw7Mk&t=1893s |access-date=10 April 2025 |website=YouTube}}

File:AFU Ionia.png in July 2023.]]

The AFU Act has origins with the national grassroots nonprofit organization [https://www.americanfamiliesunited.org/ American Families United] (AFU) and affiliated entity, [https://afuaction.org/ AFU Action.]

AFU was founded in 2006 to represent the interests of United States citizens who are married to foreign nationals. By 2006, affects of the implementation of IRAIRA spurred the creation of such an organization. In addition to legislative solutions, AFU works directly with presidential administrations and advocates in the press and on social media.{{Cite web |title=American Families United |url=https://www.americanfamiliesunited.org/about_us |access-date=2025-04-08 |website=American Families United |language=en}}{{Cite web |title=About |url=https://www.americanfamiliesunited.org/about_2019_02_24 |access-date=2025-04-08 |website=American Families United |language=en}}

File:AFU Capitol.png in August 2024.]]

The American Families United Act has earned broad support across diverse sectors, including the business community, faith-based organizations, the agricultural industry and farm groups, local and municipal governments, labor unions, veterans groups, educators, and law enforcement. It also continues to receive strong backing from immigration advocacy groups, civil rights and human rights organizations, and the legal community.{{Cite web |title=American Families United Act 2025 |url=https://afuaction.org/?page_id=2 |access-date=2025-04-13 |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |title=American Families United |url=https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/american-families-united/ |access-date=2025-04-13 |website=InfluenceWatch |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |last=McQuaid |first=Matthew |date=2021-11-02 |title=Teamsters Join in Rally to Keep American Families United, Urge Passage of Bill |url=https://teamster.org/2021/11/teamsters-join-in-rally-to-keep-american-families-united-urge-passage-of-bill/ |access-date=2025-04-13 |website=International Brotherhood of Teamsters |language=en}}

Notable labor union endorsements include the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT), the National Education Association (NEA), the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

The [https://abic.us/ American Business Immigration Coalition] (ABIC) has worked closely with [https://www.americanfamiliesunited.org/ American Families United] and [https://afuaction.org/ AFU Action] on advancing the interests of mixed status families and championing the AFU Act. ABIC describes itself:

ABIC is a bipartisan coalition of over 1,700 employers and CEOs from across the country to provide a strong and unified voice seeking lasting immigration solutions. ABIC employers include agriculture, manufacturing, healthcare, hospitality, technology, and construction.[https://abic.us/about-us/]

File:2025-03-26 Secure Americas Workforce event Washington DC 11-13-07 1.jpg grounds on March 26th, 2025. Also pictured are U.S. Representatives María Elvira Salazar ({{USpolabbr|R|FL|27|link=y}}), Dan Newhouse ({{USpolabbr|R|WA|4|link=y}}), and Tom Suozzi ({{USpolabbr|D|NY|3|link=y}}).]]

The provisions of the Act allow for case-by-case determinations only and do not permit blanket waivers.

The Act grants immigration judges and government adjudicators the discretion to make decisions in cases involving the spouses or children of U.S. citizens when their removal would cause hardship to the citizen family member. The Act defines family separation as a form of hardship. This discretion may include declining to issue a notice to appear in removal proceedings, terminating removal proceedings, refusing to issue or reinstate a removal order, waiving inadmissibility grounds, or granting permission to reapply for admission to the United States. Additionally, a special provision applies to surviving spouses and children of deceased U.S. citizens, allowing similar discretionary relief within two years of the citizen’s death, or later only in extraordinary circumstances.

The Act specifies several exclusions, including cases involving individuals convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude or those deemed national security threats.

The Act allows for case-by-case discretionary reconsideration of past denials that would have received favorable outcomes and relief from family separation under the Act's new discretionary provisions and exclusions. For reconsideration, applicants must file within two years of the Act's enactment, or later only in extraordinary circumstances.

The American Families United Act would primarily impact approximately 1.2 million married U.S. citizens with undocumented spouses, according to FWD.us (2024).{{cite web |url=https://www.fwd.us/news/american-families-united-act/ |title=American Families United Act |publisher=FWD.us |date=2024 |access-date=}} This figure is a part of a larger estimated constituency of 2.6 million U.S. citizen family members. Estimates are based on the American Community Survey (ACS) 2023 data, projected to the end of 2024, using a methodology that assigns immigration status through statistical modeling.{{cite web |url=https://www.fwd.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/241210_FWD_ACSMethodology_v2.pdf |title=Methodology: Assigning Immigration Status in the ACS |publisher=FWD.us |date=December 2024 |access-date=}}

Key demographic characteristics of the group of undocumented spouses include:

• Average age: 39 years
• Average time in the U.S.: 15 years
• Labor force participation: 75%
• Education: 75% hold a high school diploma or higher

An estimated 300,000 U.S. citizens in mixed-status marriages have relocated outside the United States to maintain family unity due to immigration barriers, per FWD.us.

A 2024 analysis by FWD.us projected the Act would add 20 billion USD annually to the United States economy and 6 billion USD annually in combined federal, state, and local taxes by granting legal status to affected families.

A BILL

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to promote family unity, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the "American Families United Act."

SEC. 2. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed—

(1) to provide the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General with the ability to exercise the discretionary authority provided in this Act, or by an amendment made by this Act, except on a case-by-case basis; or

(2) to otherwise modify or limit the discretionary authority of the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General under the immigration laws (as defined in section 101(a)(17) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17))).

SEC. 3. DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO FAMILY MEMBERS OF UNITED STATES CITIZENS.

(a) APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM REMOVAL.

Section 240(c)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)(4)) is amended by adding at the end the following:

"(D) JUDICIAL DISCRETION.

(i) IN GENERAL. In the case of an alien who is the spouse or child of a citizen of the United States, the Attorney General may, subject to clause (ii)—

(I) terminate any removal proceedings against the alien;

(II) decline to order the alien removed from the United States;

(III) grant the alien permission to reapply for admission to the United States; or

(IV) subject to clause (iii), waive the application of one or more grounds of inadmissibility or deportability in connection with any request for relief from removal.

(ii) LIMITATION ON DISCRETION.

(I) IN GENERAL. The Attorney General may exercise the discretion described in clause (i) if the Attorney General determines that removal of the alien or the denial of a request for relief from removal would result in hardship to the alien’s United States citizen spouse, parent, or child. There shall be a presumption that family separation constitutes hardship.

(II) WIDOW AND SURVIVING CHILD OF DECEASED UNITED STATES CITIZEN. In the case of the death of a citizen of the United States, the Attorney General may exercise discretion described in clause (i) with respect to an alien who was a child of such citizen, or was the spouse of such citizen and was not legally separated from such citizen on the date of the citizen’s death, if—

(aa) the Attorney General determines that removal of the child or spouse or the denial of a requested benefit would result in hardship to the child or spouse; and

(bb) the child or spouse seeks relief requiring such discretion not later than two years after the date of the citizen’s death or demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Attorney General the existence of extraordinary circumstances that prevented the spouse or child from seeking relief within such period.

(iii) EXCLUSIONS. This subparagraph shall not apply to an alien whom the Attorney General determines—

(I) is inadmissible under—

(aa) paragraph (2) or (3) of section 212(a); or

(bb) subparagraph (A), (C), or (D) of section 212(a)(10); or

(II) is deportable under paragraph (2), (4), or (6) of section 237(a)."

(b) SECRETARY’S DISCRETION.

Section 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182) is amended—

(1) by redesignating the second subsection (t) as subsection (u); and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

"(v) SECRETARY’S DISCRETION.

(1) IN GENERAL. In the case of an alien who is the spouse or child of a citizen of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security may, subject to paragraph (2)—

(A) waive the application of one or more grounds of inadmissibility or deportability in connection with an application for an immigration benefit or request for relief from removal;

(B) decline to issue a notice to appear or other charging document requiring such an alien to appear for removal proceedings;

(C) decline to reinstate an order of removal under section 241(a)(5); or

(D) grant such alien permission to reapply for admission to the United States or any other application for an immigration benefit.

(2) LIMITATION ON DISCRETION.

(A) IN GENERAL. The Secretary of Homeland Security may exercise discretion described in paragraph (1) if the Secretary determines that removal of the alien or the denial of a requested benefit would result in hardship to the alien’s United States citizen spouse, parent, or child. There shall be a presumption that family separation constitutes hardship.

(B) WIDOW AND ORPHAN OF DECEASED UNITED STATES CITIZEN. In the case of the death of a citizen of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security may exercise discretion described in paragraph (1) with respect to an alien who was a child of such citizen, or was the spouse of such citizen and was not legally separated from such citizen on the date of the citizen’s death, if—

(i) the Secretary determines that the denial of a requested benefit would result in hardship to the child or spouse; and

(ii) the child or spouse seeks relief requiring such discretion not later than two years after the date of the citizen’s death or demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary the existence of extraordinary circumstances that prevented the spouse or child from seeking relief within such period.

(3) EXCLUSIONS. This subsection shall not apply to an alien whom the Secretary determines—

(A) is inadmissible under—

(i) paragraph (2) or (3) of subsections (a); or

(ii) subparagraphs (A), (C), or (D) of subsection (a)(10); or

(B) is deportable under paragraphs (2), (4), or (6) of section 237(a)."

SEC. 4. MOTIONS TO REOPEN OR RECONSIDER.

(a) IN GENERAL. A motion to reopen or reconsider the denial of a petition or application or an order of removal for an alien may be granted if such petition, application, or order would have been adjudicated in favor of the alien had this Act, or an amendment made by this Act, been in effect at the time of such denial or order.

(b) FILING REQUIREMENT. A motion under subsection (a) shall be filed no later than the date that is two years after the date of the enactment of this Act, unless the alien demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary of Homeland Security or Attorney General, as appropriate, the existence of extraordinary circumstances that prevented the alien from filing within such period.

{{Reflist}}

Category:United States proposed federal immigration and nationality legislation

Category:Proposed legislation of the 113th United States Congress

Category:Family disruption

Category:Bipartisanship