Who could apply
You'd need to have lived here since December 31, 2020, with only the absences Congress allows. Congress would set the proof needed. Later arrivals would get no new SEAL route, but help centers would check for options under today's law.
Step by step
- Check privately first. I'd offer a free self-check on paper or offline, with no names or identifying details. It would give a starting point for legal review, not an eligibility decision. I'd only offer a software version after testing shows it sends nothing, and it would explain what it keeps and how to erase it. Nobody would ask you to write down anything about your past before you have a lawyer or accredited representative.
- Get qualified help, or file on your own. Law offices and recognized nonprofits would run help centers, as community groups did in 1986. Authorized lawyers and accredited representatives would answer questions about individual cases, and other helpers would work only under the supervision and limits the law sets. You could file on your own or use any lawful representative instead. A center would need your written consent for each records request and again before filing. Withdrawing consent would stop new steps, but couldn't undo a disclosure already made.
- Gather your records. Congress would create an audited nonprofit Records Office, outside DHS, to request court and agency records, with your written consent for each request. Record holders would still know whose records they were, so the protection would come from a law limiting how they could use or share SEAL requests, the answers and anything drawn from them. For people using a lawyer or accredited representative, that helper would approve each request and its order. People filing on their own could use the Records Office too. Before each request, the Records Office would explain what that record holder keeps and when it can share it. Congress would set each source's rules and what happens when a record is missing or can't be released.
- Settle taxes and get a second check. A qualified tax professional would check which returns you had to file, correct mistakes and set up payment. Back taxes would stay separate from the SEAL fine. For files a help center prepares, a qualified reviewer who didn't prepare the file would check it before filing.
- File, only after the law passes. You'd file after SEAL becomes law, filing opens, and you approve the complete application and what it discloses. USCIS would take fingerprints, run its own checks and decide. I'd protect applicants from detention and removal once they file and show they likely qualify, including people already in removal cases. Congress would define that finding, the narrow exceptions and how DHS could challenge it. Provisional status would come after USCIS finishes the eligibility and security checks.
- The decision. Congress would fund USCIS to meet published processing targets. USCIS would send unclear cases to senior review, and deny a case only after showing that a legal bar applies and considering any allowed waiver. Applicants would get written reasons, a chance to fix mistakes and an appeal. A missed target would never mean an automatic approval, and no case would skip a check.
- Keeping your status. Adults would get renewable legal status and work permission, with no special SEAL path to citizenship. You'd renew by continuing to meet the rules. The law would allow for disability, caregiving, retirement, losing a job through no fault of your own, a break in school and trouble paying, and you'd get notice, a chance to fix a problem and a review before losing status. You wouldn't get federal benefits based on income, such as food stamps, while you hold SEAL status. You'd pay Social Security and Medicare taxes under the usual rules. Work after you get status could earn Social Security credit; past work without authorization wouldn't count under my proposal.
- The last step. Moving from provisional to full SEAL status would depend on border and E-Verify milestones. The Comptroller General, who runs GAO, Congress's auditing agency, would certify each one from DHS's numbers. The law would set a fallback date, so people aren't stuck waiting if the government misses a milestone. There'd be no English or civics test to apply. Before this last step, adults would need basic English and civics or be taking classes, with exceptions for age and disability. People brought here as children would have a separate path to permanent residence and citizenship, and would meet the citizenship standard on that path.
What would stay private
I'd ask Congress to protect SEAL questions, records requests, help-center files and applications, including information about people who never file, withdraw or get denied. Each disclosure would need your consent unless one of four exceptions applies: fraud in the application, national security, investigating a felony that has nothing to do with immigration status, and identifying a body. Each exception would need written approval, a record of who saw what and an independent review, with penalties for misuse stronger than the Dignity Act's $10,000 fine. I'd also limit immigration enforcement at and near help centers and the Records Office, with clear boundaries, narrow emergency exceptions and independent review. Asking for help alone wouldn't stop a removal.
Records and the rules
A felony conviction, a conviction immigration law calls an aggravated felony, or three misdemeanor convictions on different dates would rule a person out. Minor traffic tickets, immigration-status offenses and simple marijuana possession wouldn't count toward the three. Congress would define the convictions and rules, with a fair review.
Under my proposal, minor traffic offenses other than DUI, and driving without a license, wouldn't count against anyone by themselves or set off a SEAL report to enforcement. They'd stay on the record, and today's law would still apply. Congress would publish the full list of minor offenses before applications open.
I'd bar prosecution for past use of someone else's Social Security number only to work, if the person discloses it through the protected SEAL process, fixes the real owner's earnings record and repays any loss. Federal law already gives certain people legalized under the 1986 law limited protection for older Social Security offenses. Selling or making cards, or using a number to get credit, benefits or loans, would rule a person out.
Source: Social Security Act §208(e), ssa.gov
For DUI:
- One misdemeanor DUI, no one hurt, sentence finished: the person could make their case in an individual review, after a warning up front about the odds and any added cost.
- A second DUI conviction: senior review, with the same warning.
- A DUI conviction for killing or seriously injuring someone would rule a person out. So would a third DUI conviction when another DUI conviction came in the ten years before it.
For domestic violence:
- A domestic-violence felony, or a second domestic-violence conviction, would rule a person out.
- A first misdemeanor would go to senior review, which would look at what happened, whether the applicant was really the victim, whether the sentence and any required classes are finished, and whether any protective order was followed. It would count toward the three-misdemeanor limit.
Families
Families would apply together, but USCIS would judge each person separately. One relative's record alone would never rule out another. A family waiver could cover lesser problems, but never violent or serious crimes or any domestic-violence conviction.
If one family member doesn't qualify, I'd bar the government from using the family's SEAL application to find or act against that person, and a denial would never set off an automatic report to enforcement. Only the four exceptions above could allow that, with the same written approval, record and independent review. This wouldn't stop enforcement that starts somewhere else, like an existing removal order.
Spouses and children could apply together if each meets the 2020 date. SEAL status would create no new right to bring relatives from abroad.
What it would cost
I'd set the adult fine at $4,500, paid over up to five years, with no fine for people brought here as children and a limit set in law on what one family pays. The normal USCIS filing and renewal fees would be on top. I picked $4,500 because, with those fees, it could cover what the program costs; that's a goal, not a promise. Hardship waivers would come out of the fee account, auditors would check how the government spends the money, and Congress would put up the money to get started.
Watch for scams
There's no application for my proposed SEAL program today and no place in line to buy. Paying a lawyer or accredited representative for real help under today's law is different. In Kansas, being a notary gives someone no authority to give immigration advice.
Source: K.S.A. 53-5a25, Kansas Legislature