More than one million people nationwide took to the streets yesterday, calling for the first broad changes in U.S. immigration policy in more than two decades. The issue has divided the country and could play a major role in upcoming congressional elections. Immigrant rights groups, Latino advocacy organizations and labor unions and religious institutions have backed the protests, part of what organizers deem the National Day of Action for Immigrant Justice.

Stanford students who are concerned about H.R.4437 and the currently stalled compromise in the Senate joined the protests, donning white clothing and reciting chants such as, “We didn’t cross the border, the border crossed us.” In addition, protesters constructed a wall, using temporary plastic fencing, stretching from Old Union to the front of the Stanford Bookstore.

“We built a fence in order to recreate the border — the physical one between the U.S. and Mexico and the psychological one that comes out of intolerance that many immigrants must face,” said sophomore Joshua Bogus. “The goal was that we could make a disturbance getting people to bother to notice the injustice resulting from some of the proposed legislation in Washington regarding immigrants’ rights.”

In Washington, the Senate adjourned last week for a two-week recess after it was unable to reach an agreement on how to deal with the 11 to 12 million people who are in the United States illegally.

According to the proposed legislation, immigrants residing in the U.S for more than five years would be put on a track for citizenship after paying fines, learning English and paying back taxes. It would take six additional years to attain citizenship. The middle group — those in the U.S. for between two to five years — would have to leave the United States but would be quickly allowed to return on temporary work visas and would eventually be eligible for citizenship. Those living illegally in the United States for less than two years would be sent back to their native countries where they would compete with those immigrants seeking to enter legally.

Some conservatives oppose the compromise as a form of amnesty, arguing that porous borders are a national security concern.

On Dec. 6, 2005, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) introduced the “Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005” (H.R. 4437). The bill passed in the House of Representatives by a vote of 239-182 on Dec. 16.

Opponents of the bill claim it will criminalize anyone, including religious institutions, who aids an undocumented immigrant by providing such things as health care, food or education. In addition, the House bill proposes building 700 miles of wall along the border at an estimated cost of $2 billion.

The fate of the Senate bill remains to be seen. Even if the bill does pass, it would have to be reconciled with a tougher House version that has no provision for a guest worker program.