We the People...

I went home for Thanksgiving this year for the first time since I left the USA. My Mom and Grandma decorated the whole house for Christmas in anticipation of my arrival and baked about 6 dozen Christmas cookies. My brother and his wife put everything else in their lives aside to spend all of their spare time with me and together we had an amazing week as a family just doing normal things like going to the grocery store (every day, for some reason), playing games and watching TV. I am finally in a place to really appreciate and be comforted by being in my Mom’s home.

My partner didn’t come with me this time and her absence didn’t go unnoticed. We celebrated Christmas on Thanksgiving Day, because we haven’t had a Christmas together since 2004. I passed along presents from C and her family and received presents for her from everyone else. My Grandma, a woman of many talents, even made clutch purses for C’s mother, sisters-in-law and niece. Funnily enough, Grandma didn’t think C was a clutch-purse kind of gal, but she did get her a nice plaid shirt from American Eagle. My brother and sister-in-law got us matching fleeces and socks. Ironically, I don’t think they know how incredibly lesbian that is, which made it even more endearing.

On the day I returned to the UK, my Grandma told me I must have a screw loose – because why else would I want to live in a cold, rainy country? She told me if I moved back to the USA she would buy me a house and a car, and she wasn’t joking. She misses me desperately – they all do. The short bursts of time we spend together are vital emotional recharges that get us by, but it never seems like enough time. We always feel like we’re saying goodbye.

I’ve never actually spoken to my Grandma about the nature of my relationship with my partner, but I know she understands. She stopped warning me to “Stay Away from Boys” many years ago. Just before I got on the bus to O’Hare, Grandma gave me a big cuddle and said to tell C she was counting down the sleeps until our visit next March, and that we should take care of each other between now and then. While I talk to my Grandma almost every weekend, and we occasionally Skype, moments like that can only ever happen in person.

It’s only recently that I’ve tried to explain to friends and family, and now complete strangers, exactly what it feels like to not be able to go ‘home’. I struggle with finding the words to accurately reflect the layers of emotions around the subject, but I think one of the main reasons it is so hard to get the message across is because most of the people I talk to do not fundamentally understand the significance of the barriers in place. In fact, it’s taken me a long time to really understand these, mostly because the legislative system in the USA is messy and complex.

Please bear with me while I summarise it here. I know this is the boring bit, but it is incredibly important to understand the basic legal context. I’ve kept this as short and simple as possible.

In the US, some issues are regulated at a federal level and some are delegated down to state level.

The basis for the federal government, including how it can create and implement laws, is defined by the US Constitution. In general, the federal government is concerned with issues that transcend state boundaries. For our purposes here, this includes defining federal-level spousal rights, responsibilities and benefits as well as immigration laws.

All 50 states are autonomously governed, which means each has its own constitution and can make their own laws, including those relating to state-level spousal rights, responsibilities and benefits.

In 1996, Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) into law. Section 3 of DOMA defines ‘marriage’ as a legal union between one man and one woman and ‘spouse’ as only a person of the opposite sex. This definition applies to any ruling, regulation or interpretation of federal law. So, when immigration laws permit American citizens or permanent residents to sponsor their spouse to come and live in the US, ‘spouse’ is as defined by DOMA.

DOMA cannot prohibit states from legalising same-sex unions (that would require an amendment to the US Constitution), but it does ‘protect’ states from being ‘forced’ to recognise unions legalised by other states. The issue of same-sex unions is fiercely controversial in the US. At the time of writing, California, Colorado, Connecticut,  Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, Washington and the District of Colombia have laws in place that extend spousal rights to same-sex couples in some form.

Regardless of what happens at the state-level, though, DOMA prevents American citizens and permanent residents from sponsoring same-sex partners to come and live in the US.

DOMA was fast-tracked through a Republican-controlled Congress under a Democrat president – not dissimilar from the situation we’re now in following the mid-term elections in November. I voted absentee in that election and made sure to carefully select candidates who reflected my own priorities and values. Unfortunately, not all of my preferred candidates won. At the time I didn’t think much of what the consequences of that actually meant.

So, after coming home from Thanksgiving, I did a bit of research into the people representing me in Congress to see if I could appeal to any of them to advocate for immigration equality for same-sex couples. Here is what I found out:

Representative Tim Johnson (R-Illinois) voted in favour of a Constitutional amendment to prevent recognition of same-sex unions, he voted against laws to protect gays from being discriminated against in employment and he has consistently voted against repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. I don’t think I can really consider him an ally.

There is speculation around newly-elected Senator Mark Kirk’s (R-Illinois) sexuality. He’s made some rather insensitive comments in the past that make me think that, whether he is or isn’t, this speculation is not a good thing. Let’s just say he doesn’t want to fuel the fire by advocating for LGBT issues, so no help there at the moment either.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) has a more moderate voting record for LGBT issues. He voted for DOMA, but against amending the Constitution. He’s also a sponsor of the DREAM act, which proposes a route to citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants. I figured if anyone could understand my situation, he was probably my man. So, I wrote him a heartfelt letter...