Are Contradictory Immigration Laws Leaving Families in Legal Limbo?

 PHOENIX, Az. – The contents of Maria Teresa Fuentes’ immigration file take up an entire table. Legal appeals, government letters carrying bad news, attorney advertisements clipped from newspapers, technical explanations of cryptic immigration laws, a Spanish prayer printed on blue paper... Collectively, they tell the story of a fight that’s been going on for years; one that Fuentes doesn’t want to see come to an end. At least, not like this.

Fuentes, 40, is not likely what most people envision when they imagine an undocumented immigrant. She is an entrepreneur, the owner of two hair salons, the wife of a U.S. citizen and the mother of two children, ages 3 and 6 – the eldest of whom has been receiving treatment for behavioral issues.

It’s late at night for our interview, and Fuentes’ hair seems unusually messy for a hairstylist, as if she just rushed out of the house. She pulls out a letter that says it all. An immigration judge has ordered her to leave the country by December 17 of this year.

“This is ironic,” she said, as she pulled out her wallet to show me her work permit. Despite the deportation order for December, her permit is valid until August 2012.

Her situation illustrates the complexities of a set of immigration laws that some attorneys claim are out of date and have led to unfair outcomes for people like Fuentes, whose legal fate remains undetermined despite an announcement by President Obama earlier this year that he will ask immigration prosecutors to focus on deporting only serious criminals from the country.  And even if Fuentes were allowed to stay in the country under these new guidelines, she would have no assurance that the government wouldn't deport her in the future.

Following Love Across the Border

Fuentes came to Arizona 12 years ago to start a new life with her husband Martin, a U.S. citizen. It’s been a life of uncertainty and stress for the couple ever since, as they’ve worked through the legal system to remain united in the U.S. as a family with their two children.

She met her husband in their hometown of Zamora, Michoacán when they were both in their late 20s. He lived in the U.S. and was just there to visit a relative.

“People don’t believe in love at first sight, but it happens,” said Fuentes.

The two carried on a long distance relationship, going through endless calling cards to talk to each other every night. They finally married in September 1999. She didn’t want to move to the U.S., but he convinced her.

What happened next would affect the course of her life. 

Fuentes paid a Mexican attorney – recommended by a friend -- to complete her visa application at the U.S. embassy in Mexico City. She had grown tired of never getting an appointment at the embassy, waiting for hours in the long lines. An attorney, she hoped, could aid in the process.

“I trusted him blindly,” she lamented. 

Eventually, Fuentes got her passport back from the attorney with what she thought was a valid visa. But when she arrived at the U.S. port of entry in San Ysidro, California, immigration agents detained her for questioning. Fuentes was soon sent back to Mexico and accused of presenting a fraudulent document in an attempt to enter the U.S. illegally.

Over the next few days, Fuentes waited in Tijuana and considered her options – to remain in Mexico or to cross illegally and reunite with her husband in the U.S. She took a chance, and chose the latter.

Legal Limbo

Back in the U.S., Fuentes filed paperwork in 2001 to become a legal resident under a federal immigration law that was being phased out but still in effect at that time, known as section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The law afforded people who entered the country illegally but were married to a U.S. citizen the opportunity to legalize their immigration status.