Proposal would force legal residents to replace green cards

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) is considering a proposal to eliminate hundreds of thousands of green cards that were issued between 1979 and 1989.

The cards, which were issued without expiration dates, would be upgraded to store personal information electronically.

Officials at CIS say that the new cards would be more difficult to counterfeit. Like cards issued after 1989, they will expire every ten years.

“The photos on the old cards are more than 18 years old,” said Sharon Rummery, a spokesperson for CIS, “and the security features are not as good.” She explained that the new card includes holograms of U.S. presidents, which are difficult to duplicate.

CIS is currently reviewing comments that have been submitted in response to the proposal. As of now, there is no timeline for implementation.

If the proposal, which was issued on Aug. 22, moves forward, legal permanent residents would have 120 days to apply for new cards. Failure to comply with this would be a misdemeanor, which could result in $100 fine and/or imprisonment of up to 30 days.

Immigration attorneys are concerned about the financial burden their clients will bear if the proposal is implemented. The card costs $290 plus an additional $80 for fingerprinting and photo fees.

“For our clients who earn low incomes, the new cards are cost prohibitive,” said Erica Schommer, Human Trafficking Team manager at the Weslaco-based Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid.

Rummery defends the high costs by noting that CIS runs its business on fees alone.

“The cost of the card,” she said, “reflects the cost of providing services.”

Permanent residents who replace their green cards will also be subject to criminal background checks. If an infraction—even one as minor as a traffic citation—is uncovered, they might be asked to provide relevant paperwork, including proof of an indictment and its dismissal.

In many situations, said Schommer, these records might be difficult to find, further complicating the replacement process.

“Farm workers who travel often might have a documented infraction in a different state,” she said, “but they would have to track down the proper records.”

According to Kathleen Walker, national president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) and a practicing attorney in El Paso, permanent residents in border communities might be disproportionately affected.

“The new card would be necessary for residents to cross to and from Mexico,” she said.

But when residents are applying for employment, they might be able to use a driver’s license and social security card instead of an updated green card, Walker explained.

“Even their cards are withdrawn,” she said, “it doesn’t mean they’ve lost their legal status.”

Despite the high costs and arguments against the new green cards, many groups still champion the proposal as a means of tightening national security.

“At ports of entry, the cards would be invaluable,” said T.J. Bonner, President of the National Border Patrol Council, a labor organization that represents non-supervisory U.S. Border Patrol employees.

“It’s a minor price to pay for the privilege of being admitted to our country.”