Updated: 8:15 p.m. EDT
WASHINGTON — Far-reaching legislation to grant a chance at citizenship to millions of immigrants living illegally in the United States cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee on a solid bipartisan vote Tuesday night after supporters somberly sidestepped a controversy over the rights of gay spouses.
The 13-5 vote cleared the way for an epic showdown on the Senate floor on the measure, which is one of President Barack Obama’s top domestic priorities yet also gives the Republican Party a chance to recast itself as more appealing to minorities.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy (right) confers with the committee’s ranking Republican, Sen. Chuck Grassley on Monday.
Senate Judiciary Committee members Sen. Chuck Schumer (left), and Sen. Richard Durbin.
The committee’s action sparked rejoicing from immigration activists who crowded into a Senate committee room to witness the proceedings. “Yes, we can!” they shouted as they clapped rhythmically to show their pleasure.
Never Miss a Beat
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
In addition to creating a pathway to citizenship for 11.5 million immigrants, the legislation creates a new program for low-skilled foreign labor and would permit highly skilled workers into the country at far higher levels than is currently the case.
At the same time, it requires the government to take costly new steps to guard against future illegal immigration.
There was suspense to the end of the committee’s deliberations, when Sen. Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat who serves as chairman, sparked a debate over his proposal to give same-sex and heterosexual spouses equal rights under immigration law.
“I don’t want to be the senator who asks people to choose between the love of their life and the love of their country,” he said, adding he wanted to hear from others on the committee.
In response, he heard a chorus of pleas from the bill’s supporters, seconding private appeals from the White House, not to force a vote that they warned would lead to the bill’s demise.
“I believe in my heart of hearts that what you’re doing is the right and just thing,” said one of them, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill. “But I believe this is the w rong moment, that this is the wrong bill.”
The issue of same-sex spouses hovered in the background from the start, and as the committee neared the end of its work, officials said Leahy had been informed that both the White House and Senate Democrats hoped he would not risk the destruction of months of painstaking work by putting the issue to a vote.
“There have been 300 amendments. Why shouldn’t we have one more?” he told reporters at one point, hours before called the committee into session for a final time to debate the legislation.
A few hours later, Republicans and Democrats both answered his question bluntly.
“This would fracture the coalition. I could not support the bill,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who was a member of the bipartisan so-called Gang of Eight that drafted the core elements of the bill.
Republicans and Democrats alike also noted that the Supreme Court may soon issue a ruling that renders the controversy moot.
Despite the concern that bipartisan support for the legislation was fragile, there was no doubting the command over committee proceedings that backers held.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
