Mr. Speaker. earlier this year Congressman BARNEY FRANK and I introduced H.R. 1686. which seeks to clarify the conditions permitting the immigration of certain adopted children. When the Immigration Reform and Control Act was enacted In 1986. it included an amendment offered by Congressman FRANK pertaining to the right of a natural father of an illegitimate child to petition for immigration on that childs behalf. What was intended to be an expansion of the right to petition was subsequently used by the Immigration and Naturalization Service to narrow the definition of an orphan in immigration law. The Frank amendment dealt with section 101(b)(1)(D) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 [INA]. In a March 1987 memorandum. the INS reasoned that extending such a right to an American natural father under that section meant that foreign natural fathers of illegitimate children should be considered under section 101(b)(1)(F) of the INA. Such an Interpretation effectively changed the definition of an orphan. Previously. the mother of an illegitimate child was considered the sole parent and could relinquish her child to be adopted. The child was then allowed to immigrate to the United States to be with his or her adoptive American family. INS determined that a natural father who has or had a bona fide relationship with the child was also a parent. Therefore the child had two parents and was no longer an orphan under U.S. immigration law. This matter came to my attention last year when three Florida families were in the process of adopting children in the Dominican Republic and were prohibited by INS from bringing the children home because of the new interpretation of the law. We were finally able to prevail upon INS to grant the children humanitartan parole because they had already been placed in foster care and had no homes to which they could return.
Keywords matched
Naturalization Immigration immigration immigrate