Bipartisan Immigration Amnesty Bill Has Little Chance

The Dignity Act and the Big Beautiful Bill collide.

A bipartisan initiative dubbed “the Dignity Act” that would strengthen border protections while authorizing thousands of illegal immigrants to continue to reside and work in the US has attracted widespread attention. The novelty of the legislation lies in bipartisan support: Its creative provisions combine policy initiatives that reflect a genuine effort at immigration compromise, reminiscent of a time when Americans from both sides of the political aisle were capable of coming together to accomplish important things. The bill will likely not pass, but its initiative may seed future cross-party alliances.

The Dignity Act

The lead sponsors of the Dignity Act are an unlikely duo: Republican Congresswoman Maria Elvira Salazar of Florida’s 27th District and Democratic Congresswoman Veronica Escobar of Texas’ 16th. The bill was initially introduced in 2023 but never got off the ground. The daring bipartisan duo has revised its provisions to gain more political traction.

The Dignity Act’s namesake appeals to a vision of illegal immigrants becoming legally dignified based on their work ethic and lack of criminal behavior. Foreigners in the country illegally since before 2021 could qualify under the new law to apply for a seven-year program in which they would work, pay a fine to help fund the Act’s various provisions, and extend their status for indefinite seven-year terms.

To counterbalance what may be viewed negatively by conservatives, the bill funds increased salaries for immigration officers, tightens up the amnesty program, imposes increased criminal penalties on sex trafficking, and calls for construction of a border wall. Sec. 1111 of the law draft:

“Requires DHS to deploy physical barriers, tactical infrastructure, and the most up-to-date technology along the border to achieve situational awareness and operational advantage. It updates current law by explicitly authorizing the construction of enhanced physical barriers and barrier levees.”

Immigration Horse Trading?

This provision offers a political trade-off for Republicans in exchange for legalizing illegal workers and their families. Given that Democrats have for years resisted a border wall while flinging open the gates to the nation, some Republicans may perceive this wall-building concession as too little, too late.

In a 2019 interview, Mrs. Escobar – who succeeded her progressive cohort, Beto O’Rourke, in Congress – objected to the construction of a border wall. She claimed her hometown of El Paso was “one of the safest cities in America for a couple of decades, long before we had a wall” and boasted that she had “sued the federal government to try to prevent the building of the wall.” Recent statistics contradict her claims, which may explain her shift on the big, beautiful border wall. The data website NeighborhoodScout reports:

“Based on FBI crime data, El Paso is not one of the safest communities in America. Relative to Texas, El Paso has a crime rate that is higher than 77% of the state’s cities and towns of all sizes… [V]iolent crime in El Paso occurs at a rate higher than in most communities of all population sizes in America.

“El Paso has one of the highest rates of motor vehicle theft in the nation according to our analysis of FBI crime data.”

A Hard Act to Sell

The Dignity Act faces an uphill battle in part because it is an ambitious, voluminous effort in its own right. In addition to something akin to clemency toward millions of existing illegal residents in the US, it calls to double the allotted number of legal aliens permitted to immigrate annually (Section 3202) and construct housing and facilities for those seeking legal amnesty. Section 1501 would create three “humanitarian campuses” along the US-Mexico border to conduct asylum interviews “in a non-carceral setting,” replete with family medicine and pediatric doctors, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, licensed social workers, mental health professionals, child advocates, and recreational activities. Section 3203 preserves the ability of immigrant children to receive visas or obtain permanent residency, and Section 3301 excludes spouses and minor children (labeled “derivatives”) from being counted against annual visa limitations (thus counting only “the principal applicant”).

Many of these suggested policies will not sit well with conservatives in exchange for GOP-pleasing policies such as constructing a border wall, ending catch-and-release policies, and increasing penalties for illegal voting by aliens to match the five-year prison sentence levied against US citizens (Currently, non-citizens face only a fine and up to one year in prison.) The Dignity Act is thus likely to fail to garner sufficient support for enactment, despite its ambitious aims. An additional barrier is found in the provisions of President Trump’s most recent legislative win.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act includes substantial funding for an “enforcement-first” immigration policy, including mass deportations, expansions of detention facilities, and construction of a border wall. Although nine Republican House lawmakers have signed on to the Dignity Act, conservatives are unlikely to enact a law that undermines a strong enforcement initiative, which featured prominently in the President’s election policies and is popular with voters.