Exploring New Pathways to Citizenship: Renewing the Immigration Act Registry Statute

Background

Since the introduction of the visa quota system under the Immigration Act of 1990, average wait times for visas have doubled from 2.8 years to 5.6 years. With the backlog reaching a record high of 11.3 million in 2025, at least 675,000 would-be immigrants are expected to die while awaiting their visa approval. Consequently, analyses of current pathways to citizenship and possible reformation continue to spark public and Congressional action.

Upon closer examination, the 5.6-year average processing time changes drastically depending on the type of visa. For example, some of the lowest wait times are for company-sponsored EB3 visas, which take roughly 2 years. On the other hand, wait times for certain visa categories—such as family-sponsored F3 visas—can extend to over 21 years.

As the number of visa applicants continues to grow—peaking at 34 million applicants in 2024—proposals for more efficient pathways to citizenship have piqued public interest. One such pathway is the Renewing Immigration Provisions of the Immigration Act of 1929, proposed by Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) on August 28th, 2025. If passed, this bill could offer citizenship to over 11 million immigrants waiting for their visa approval.

Introduction: Renewing the Registry Statute

The bill aims to amend the date of entry requirement described in the Registry Statute of the Immigration Act of 1929. Initially, the Registry Statute offered citizenship to those who had entered the U.S. before 1924 but lacked official paperwork. In 1986 however, Ronald Reagan amended the Statute through the Immigration Reform and Control Act, which expanded it to those who entered the United States before January 1st, 1972.

This change, in theory, allowed nearly 3 million undocumented immigrants to apply for legal status. Yet, between 2015 and 2019, only 305 people did so, showing how ineffective the 50-year-old date became. To correct this, the new bill would require proof of residence in the U.S. for at least 7 years before the application date rather than changing the date again.

Arguments in Support of Renewing the Registry Statute

Given one amendment by Republican President Reagan and the recent proposal by Democratic Senator Padilla, supporters emphasize the longstanding bipartisan support for reforming the bill. They also highlight efforts to streamline immigration policy to allow functional pathways to citizenship for those on the waitlist. Many also highlight President Reagan’s response in a 1984 presidential debate as synonymous with current Democratic policy, despite his affiliation with modern conservatism: “I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally.”

Many pro-reform arguments also compare the cost of continuing to detain and deport immigrants against the economic contributions amnesty would entail. For one, the 11 million immigrants in the U.S. pay $96.7 billion in taxes each year—a higher average tax rate, 10 percent of their income, than the top one percent of Americans, who only pay 7.2 percent of their income. Supporters also point to the fact that offering work authorization would generate $40 to $137 billion annually, since citizenship would mandate higher wages.

In contrast, deportations to Guantanamo Bay in 2025 cost $40 million a month and the 50,000 people detained in ICE facilities cost $8.2 million a day. Moreover, the military deployment to various U.S. cities has cost nearly $500 million as of November 2025. Supporters argue that further anti-immigrant legislation would not only deprive the economy of the benefits of the additional labor, but also cost taxpayers more by enforcing it.

Finally, supporters raise humanitarian concerns about the treatment of undocumented immigrants. Many highlight how their lack of official paperwork denies immigrants access to necessities like healthcare, public housing, and equal workplace protections. Analysis of healthcare outcomes for undocumented immigrants reveals they often resort to using emergency services as primary care, leading to longer hospitalizations and higher mortality rates due to delayed access to care. Moreover, roughly a third of undocumented households face food insecurity but are denied access to food stamps, further jeopardizing their health. Undocumented statuses are also associated with a higher frequency of workplace discrimination.

Arguments Against Renewing the Registry Statute

Opponents criticize the Registry Statute by analyzing the aftermath of President Reagan’s 1986 extension, which strained American resources and jeapordized the safety of immigrants. They point to the subsequent increase in human trafficking and a 17 percent increase in undocumented migrants attempting to cross the southern border. They argue that mass citizenship should not encourage illegal migration to the U.S., but deter it to protect the rule of law and avoid straining government resources.

Many opponents also believe the bill is illegal because it offers citizenship to immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally. The Registry Statute excludes people “deportable under section 1251(a)(4)(B)”— meaning that it should deport anyone who has committed a crime. Since entering the U.S. illegally is a crime, opponents have long opposed mass amnesty solutions for the immigration crisis.

Finally, opponents argue that mass amnesty is a threat to American job security. They point to the fact that immigrants form 18 percent of the labor force to claim that mass amnesty would displace American-born workers and decrease wages. This is exacerbated by fears of an economic recession and oncoming repercussions of tariffs. Opponents also point out that amnesty alone cannot fix poor working conditions for undocumented immigrants, blaming instead their “youth, low education and skill levels, limited English proficiency and short stints with specific employers.”

Conclusion

Support for changing the Registry date under the Renewing Immigration Provisions of the Immigration Act of 1929 is rooted in goals of economic reform, bipartisan cooperation, and humanitarian concern. At the same time, the proposal has faced criticism for insufficiently addressing potential strains on government resources, the economic security of legal residents, and the possibility of encouraging further unauthorized immigration. Regardless of whether the bill is ultimately adopted, it is clear that the population of approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants awaiting a path to citizenship continues to grow each year, heightening the need for systemic relief.

Exploring New Pathways to Citizenship: Renewing the Immigration Act Registry Statute was first published on The Alliance for Civic Engagement and was republished with permission.

Chloe Durham is an undergraduate student at the University of California, Berkeley, studying Linguistics and Japanese Language