Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Financial burden and systemic dysfunction block immigrants' path to citizenship

People participate in a march in support of a pathway to citizenship for immigrants on July 23, 2021 in New York City.

People participate in a march in support of a pathway to citizenship for immigrants on July 23 in New York City.

Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

Perrins is a contributing writer.

Correction: A previous version of the story incorrectly stated how the Partolan family entered the country.

Raymond Partolan entered the United States on a visa with his family at just 15 months old. They settled in Macon, Ga., and worked to establish themselves in the community. But after almost a decade of putting down roots, the Partolans' life in America was nearly upended.

In 2003, the Immigration and Naturalization Service denied the family's application for green cards so they could live permanently in the country. The Partolans began a life of uncertainty as they struggled to regain a foothold in the United States. As Raymond called it, they had "a life in the shadows."


"My family spent thousands of dollars on immigration attorneys who promised us a pathway to legal status in this country," Raymond wrote in a blog post documenting his story. "All of our appeals were denied, and the future was bleak."

Although not yet a fully naturalized citizen, Raymond finally achieved lawful permanent resident status in November 2020 — 27 years after he arrived in the United States. Now, he works as national field director for APIAVote, an organization devoted to advancing the voting rights of Asian and Pacific Islander immigrants.

The Partolans' story is echoed among other immigrants. Restrictive and expensive naturalization protocols have prevented millions from becoming citizens who can fully participate in democracy.

Roughly 10 percent of the country's electorate is made up of immigrants — about 23 million voters, according to the Pew Research Center's estimates of Census Bureau data. But financial concerns and backlogs in the naturalization system mean that millions more immigrants are losing out on the opportunity to exercise their right to vote.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services announced a new rule last summer that would have increased the fee for applicants by an average of 20 percent, starting in October 2020. It also would have eliminated many fee waivers for low-income immigrants.

While a federal court issued an injunction before the rule was implemented, it represents the growing cost of gaining the right to vote in the United States. For many immigrants, such a financial hill would be insurmountable.

If the rule had remained in effect, the application fee for a single person seeking naturalization would have jumped from $640 to $1,170, according to the Immigrant Legal Resource Center. For a couple with two children under 18, the costs to achieve citizenship would total nearly $4,500.

To determine how severely financial burdens were hindering access to citizenship, researchers at Stanford University's Immigration Policy Lab developed a program called NaturalizeNY. From 2016 to 2018, the program offered immigrants vouchers to cover the application fee, via a lottery system.

The researchers' report found that offering vouchers increased naturalization applications by 41 percent, underscoring the financial barriers many immigrants face.

For Alison Kamhi, a supervising attorney for the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, naturalization should be inclusive to anyone who's eligible.

"There are many deserving lawful permanent residents who've been in the country. This is their home. They've raised their family here. They've been hard working. We don't want them to be excluded just on a financial basis," Kamhi said.

The growing financial demands of becoming a citizen can block potential voters from fulfilling their rights from the beginning. But even those who overcome those barriers can face further difficulties.

In July, a federal judge ordered the Biden administration to immediately stop granting new applications for potential Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals status. Since 2012, the policy has served as a lifeline for many people like Partolan. Under DACA, undocumented individuals could be granted a renewable period to be free from deportation and eligible for work permits.

In Partolan's case, DACA gave him a springboard from which he could launch a career.

"DACA really allowed me to come out of my shell with the protection that I now had. I was able to come out and speak more openly about being undocumented," Raymond said. "So it allowed me to really utilize my skillset to its fullest potential."

While the barriers to immigration on an individual level are large, systemic obstacles also exist.

A report released in June by Phyllis Coven, ombudsman for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, revealed the agency is experiencing a record-high backlog of applications and petitions. The agency's struggles have persisted for years, but were exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic.

Nearly 7 million immigration and citizenship applications were pending as of March 31, according to an April report from the USCIS. If those 7 million people had been processed and registered to vote before the 2020 election, the electorate would have grown by 4.4 percent.

Application fees are a major source of revenue for the USCIS, and that reliance makes its operations unpredictable, Coven wrote in the June report.

"Policy changes or pandemics, or both, can occur in any given fee cycle," Coven's report reads. "The backlogs that now exist at the agency are a direct result of, among other things, the lack of revenue sufficient to account for the actual costs."

An overhaul of the immigration system could help make sure that people moving to the country can have a say in their own governance. For Partolan, young immigrants are the key to ensuring that their communities are represented in the decision-making processes that affect their daily lives.

"Stay strong and stay true to yourself," Partolan advises young immigrants. "Your voice is powerful and important. Don't be afraid to use it."


Read More

An illustration of the U.S. flag on the shape of the U.S. with blue and red figures of people across it.

Every state has its own constitution.

How State Constitutions Became the Battleground for American Rights and Liberties – on Both the Left and Right

Beyond picking governors, state legislators, local officials and representatives to serve in Congress, voters in almost every state this year will have the opportunity to amend the language of their state constitution. In one state, they could potentially rewrite the constitution altogether.

Though the U.S. Constitution is rarely amended, voters frequently amend their state constitutions. In every election cycle, voters are asked to ratify constitutional amendments.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protestors holding signs at a rally, one reads, "Trump is not above the law."

Protesters gather at a Nobody Is Above the Law rally protesting President Trump's interference in the Mueller investigation on November 08, 2018 in Washington, DC.

Larry French/Getty Images

The Double Standard Presidency: When We Watch Leaders Act Above the Law

Americans are told that no one is above the law. Yet every day, they watch a president behave in ways that would get any ordinary citizen fired, disciplined, confronted, or held accountable — and they watch some Americans excuse it. What makes this moment even more striking is that critics across the political spectrum, including conservatives, now warn that the presidency is operating on a dangerous double standard. This is not a partisan concern. It is a constitutional one. And it is tearing at the fabric of our democracy.

For generations, the Constitution has provided guardrails — separation of powers, checks and balances, oversight mechanisms, and limits on executive authority — designed to prevent any leader from functioning above the law. The framers feared concentrated power more than anything else. They believed that the presidency must be constrained not only by written law but by norms of restraint, dignity, and respect for institutions. Those norms held for centuries because presidents understood that the office was larger than any individual, and Congress understood that oversight was not optional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Study Reveals Sharp Generational Divide in How Latino Identity Influences Daily Life

Study Reveals Sharp Generational Divide in How Latino Identity Influences Daily Life

Latino immigrants and U.S.-born Latinos differ sharply in how much their identity shapes their daily lives, according to recent findings from the Pew Research Center’s 2025 National Survey of Latinos. The survey shows that Latino immigrants are far more likely than U.S.-born Latinos to say their identity is central to who they are, and that it influences their experiences in the United States. Pew researchers Gabriel Piña, Mark Hugo Lopez, Sahana Mukherjee, Dalia Fahmy, and Alexandra Cahn report that the divide reflects differences in cultural connection, lived experience, and generational distance from immigrant roots.

Pew’s analysis finds that Latino immigrants are significantly more likely to say their origins are central to their identity, while U.S.-born Latinos — especially those in the third generation or higher — are less likely to feel that connection. The report notes that “U.S. Hispanics are divided on whether their identity helps or hurts them in America,” with some respondents describing their Latino identity as a source of pride and connection, and others saying it is tied to discrimination or barriers.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Democracy Cannot Run on an AI Model

Clerk Matthew Sandbar, 34, demonstrates part of the ballot-sorting process to members of the media attending a walkthrough of the Philadelphia Ballot Processing Center used to process the ballots of the 2022 US midterm elections, in Philadelphia on October 27, 2022.

Photo by Ryan Collerd / AFP via Getty Images

A Democracy Cannot Run on an AI Model

Tallying the results of Washington, DC’s first ranked-choice election in June took about 10 days—longer than many voters are used to. In an age when artificial intelligence can generate an answer in seconds, waiting days for election results can feel old-fashioned, inefficient, even suspicious. And it is about to matter far more widely. This November, 17 states, cities, and counties will use ranked-choice voting, including Maine and Alaska statewide, in races that could help decide control of Congress. More voters than ever will watch results take days to resolve, and more will be asked to trust a count they cannot see.

But that slowness may be one of its most democratic features.

Keep ReadingShow less