OPINION: My Path to Legal Status for Illegal Immigrants Is Strict, But Fair

OPINION: My Path to Legal Status for Illegal Immigrants Is Strict, But Fair
Published: 26 Jan, 2016
2 min read

We are in the middle of our “One California” tour SundheimforSenate.com\tour, #DufTour on Twitter. This 6-week tour will take us from the California-Oregon border to the California-Mexico border.

We have had as many as 18 events in three days. At several events I have been asked whether I support a pathway to legal status for those who are in the country illegally.

After 32 years of marriage I am beginning to learn it is not what I say that counts, but what my wife hears. And even though I believe I have delivered a consistent message on this issue, some apparently have heard me differently.

Consequently, I thought it would be worth taking a minute to restate my position.

I support a strict, fair path to legal status:

  • If they are in the country illegally, they must come forward and apply for probationary status (10 years).
  • To gain probationary status: they must be in U.S. prior to January 1, 2014, pay $1,000 fine, back taxes, pass a criminal background check, learn English (and then pass proficiency test).
  • During the probationary status period: they must remain employed, not acquire a criminal record, not become delinquent with taxes.
  • At the successful conclusion of the probationary status period, they are eligible to apply for permanent resident status.
  • Failure to comply with these probationary status requirements shall result in immediate deportation

Upon the successful conclusion of the probationary status period, if these individuals are interested in obtaining citizenship, they are free to do so. They would follow the law as it stands at such time, just like anyone who comes to the U.S. legally. The fact that they were part of the “Path to Legal Status” program shall not be considered a plus or a negative in such determination.

Of course this is a thumbnail sketch of a very complicated issue. I not only am open to additional input, I encourage it.

Photo Credit: Leena Robinson / shutterstock.com

You Might Also Like

New IVP 2026 California Governor Poll: What the Toplines Don’t Tell You
New IVP 2026 California Governor Poll: What the Toplines Don’t Tell You
Using verified California voter file data, IVP surveyed high-propensity voters from February 13 through 20. The poll tested first-choice ballot preferences alongside issue intensity on affordability and the cost of living, immigration enforcement, more choice reform, and more....
23 Feb, 2026
-
10 min read
81% of Americans Say Money Controls Politics – Can a Constitutional Amendment Fix It?
81% of Americans Say Money Controls Politics – Can a Constitutional Amendment Fix It?
Polls consistently show that nearly all Americans across the political spectrum agree that there is too much money in politics – whether from foreign sources, corporations, or so-called “dark money” groups. ...
23 Feb, 2026
-
13 min read
10 Reasons Why the Congressional Stock Trading Ban Will Never Pass
10 Reasons Why the Congressional Stock Trading Ban Will Never Pass
The overlap between committee assignments and stock ownership is not automatically illegal. Because the current legal framework permits this proximity as long as disclosure rules are followed, lawmakers are not operating under a system that forces change....
20 Feb, 2026
-
4 min read