White House stands by visa bill critics call discriminatory
Nahal Toosi
Politico
The Obama administration is standing by visa-related legislation that discriminates against certain European and other would be-visitors to the U.S. based on their ethnic and ancestral background.
The stance has startled a growing number of civil liberties and human rights groups, who say it is hypocritical in light of President Barack Obama’s fury over calls by GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump to bar Muslims from the U.S.
Nearly three dozen House members, including some who voted in favor of the legislation, sent a letter to Senate leaders Friday urging them to remove the discriminatory provisions as that chamber examines the bill, implying the measure was not been properly vetted before it overwhelmingly passed the House earlier this week.
The White House, however, when pressed on whether it understood the implications of the provisions in question, said it did and that it continues to support the bill.
“We have been aware of the details of this bipartisan compromise and like any compromise piece of legislation, there is some give and take, but we believe this legislation as a whole strikes the appropriate balance between ensuring the security of the homeland, while allowing for legitimate travel to the U.S.,” a senior administration official told POLITICO.
The bill that passed the House makes a series of changes to the visa waiver program. Advocacy groups say the sections that bar certain people with dual citizenship from being allowed to visit the U.S. without a visa are discriminatory.
Under the bill, people who are dual nationals of Iraq and Syria are singled out, while those with Iranian and Sudanese heritage also appear to be affected. Laws governing dual nationality are vague, but broadly speaking, many people can be considered nationals of a country even if they have never been there.
For example, a person born and raised in France and who has a French passport is still considered a Syrian national by the Syrian government if his or her father is Syrian. Under the bill, that person would have to get a visa before coming to the United States, even if he or she has never visited Syria, while most other French citizens would not.
“Last Sunday, the president reminded the world that the Islamic State terrorist group, not Muslims, is the threat to the U.S. Why then is the administration supporting a visa waiver bill that patently discriminates against people of Iranian, Iraqi, Sudanese or Syrian parentage — even if they have never set foot inside countries where the terrorists are active?” asked Joanne Lin, legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union.
Samer Khalaf, president of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, expressed disappointment in the president as well as usually friendly members of Congress who voted for the bill. He noted that the majority of the people who would be affected by the dual nationality provision would be Muslim.
“In one breath we say we welcome them, and then we preface it and say we welcome them — except,” he said. “It’s very much the epitome of hypocrisy when they do that.”
The visa waiver program allows citizens of 38 countries, including much of Europe, to visit the United States without a visa, and some 20 million people, many of them tourists, take advantage of it each year. The Nov. 13 attacks in Paris spurred lawmakers to tighten the program to prevent would be terrorists from coming to the U.S. visa-free.
Some of the provisions have drawn criticism for other reasons. For instance, humanitarian workers are concerned about a provision that would bar visa-free travel to any citizen of the 38 countries who has visited Iraq or Syria since March 2011. The European Union, meanwhile, has emphasized that its visa waiver agreement with the United States is reciprocal, meaning it may institute similar curbs on Americans visiting Europe.
But the dual nationality aspect has drawn growing criticism as more people have become aware of its implications. On Thursday, 76 civil liberties, minority rights and other groups wrote to House and Senate leaders urging them to adjust the legislation.
“It is wrong and un-American to punish groups without reason solely based on their nationality, national origin, religion, gender, or other protected grounds,” the letter states.
Source: www.politico.com