On Thursday, the California supreme court ruled that Sergio C Garcia, an undocumented immigrant from Mexico, could receive an official license to practice law in the state. Garcia came to the US at age 17 and has been waiting for an informal immigration visa for nearly 20 yearsnearly 20 years. Immigration law expert Shamaine Daniels and Stanford University law student Michael Ramos-Lynch explain what it means for America's immigration laws and debate.  2014 begins with a reminder that Congress' unwillingness to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill continues to create unforeseen complications for even the most mundane and uncontroversial functions of government.  After a strenuous legal battle, the California supreme court issued its opinion on Sergio Garciaissued its opinion on Sergio Garcia. The case is important, not because it will change the way law is practiced in the United States, nor because it will change anyone's immigration status, but because it illustrates the untenability of our current immigration laws, and the need of a truly comprehensive immigration bill.  Sergio Garcia's story is a relatively typical one: he went to law school, took the California Bar Exam, and passed it; he applied for admission to the State Bar, passed the background and character examinations and his application was forwarded to the California supreme court for approval. For most people, this would be great news, but for Garcia, it would be the beginning of a long and complex legal battle. As it turns out, Garcia is one of those millions of immigrants our current immigration system, and the systems that interact with it, are incapable of dealing with. Garcia is the son of a US citizen. His father's family petition for him was approved in 1995. He has been waiting in the metaphorical "immigration line" since then for his visa to arrive, a line that would be shorter if he were from any country other than Mexico. In other words, he is in the United States currently without authorization. Concern over the implications of his immigration status led the California supreme court, the entity responsible for issuing law licenses in California, to ask The Committee of Bar Examiners of the State Bar of California to explain why it would be lawful for the California supreme court to grant such a license.  The question in this case was a very narrow legal one. Can the California supreme court grant a law license to an unauthorized alien? Law licensing has historically fallen under the exclusive purview of the states, and specifically their courts. At times, the federal government has regulated the granting of law licenses to ensure compliance with the US constitution, such as preventing discriminatory practices in the issuance of said licenses. At present, Congress adopted specifically prohibits state agencies from granting professional licenses to unauthorized aliens, but there's a provision that allows states to override the prohibition.  The United States argued in its amicus brief that the California court was, in fact, a state agency and issuing a license would run afoul of this prohibition in the absence of a state statute specifically authorizing unauthorized aliens the ability to secure professional licenses. Shortly after the case began, the California Legislature passed a bill granting professional licenses to unauthorized aliens, and the United States did not amend its original amicus brief. It is telling that in 2013, the state that gave birth to the anti-immigrant ordinances that flourished across the country, but have not been able to pass constitutional muster, was now almost unanimously granting unauthorized aliens the ability to secure professional licenses. The bill passed in the California Senate 29-5 and passed in the California House 62-4. With a California statute granting unauthorized aliens the ability to secure a law license, the answer to the legal question is a very clear "yes".  Overall the case is a victory for immigrants because it sends the message that regardless of unpopularity, courts will follow the law. It is also a victory because it was an opportunity to illustrate some of the absurdities imbedded in our immigration laws. If Sergio Garcia had been living in Mexico at the time of his application, there would be no immigration bar to him becoming a licensed attorney and this case would not be brought before the courts. Sergio's immigration sin, in essence, was that he lived in the United States.  It is unclear how many law students will now become eligible to seek law licenses in California, or what employment implications this opinion will have for attorneys who are unauthorized aliens. There are three things, however, that are clear because of this case: first, Congress has to pass a comprehensive immigration bill this year. Second, if Congress doesn't act, we will have states drafting legislation that include the words "authorize unauthorized aliens". And third, judging from the way this case was handled, I would hire Mr Garcia any day to represent me, unless that would run afoul of current immigration law, but I guess we will have to wait for the next round of litigation to figure that out.  Sergio Garcia is the first openly undocumented immigrant to be admitted to a California bar. He was born in Mexico in 1977, and his parents brought him to California when he was 17 months old. They moved back to Mexico when he was nine and returned to California in 1994 when he was 17. He's lived here ever since, undocumented.  His father obtained a permanent resident status and filed for an immigration visa petition for Sergio in 1994, which allows Sergio to apply for a permanent resident status when an immigrant visa number becomes available. He's been waiting for about 20 years, however, due to a massive backlog of other applicants. In that time, he graduated from college and went on to obtain a law degree and pass the California bar exam while supporting himself by picking almonds and working in a grocery store.  The importance of the California supreme court's decision to grant Sergio a license to practice law cannot be understated. The decision clarifies a number of ambiguous issues regarding how Sergio's unlawful status in the US and general employment restrictions on undocumented immigrants impacts his ability to practice law. Simply put, Sergio's undocumented status does not disqualify his admission to the bar for any kind of "moral fitness" objection. Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye quoted from an earlier case:  Because the law does not always coincide exactly with principles of morality there are cases that are crimes that would not necessarily involve moral turpitude.  According to the court, the mere act of being undocumented is not sufficient to raise concerns about a person's moral fitness (moral fitness being a requirement for admission to a state bar). Additionally, the court clarified that "… existing federal limitations on the employment of undocumented immigrants do not justify excluding undocumented immigrants from admission to the state bar." So even though it appears Sergio could only legally practice if he opens his own firm, the court does not believe that is a reason to deny him a license to practice law.  The decision, however, does something much more powerful than clarify legal issues. It signals to a massive number of responsible, intelligent, deeply driven, undocumented immigrants that the American Dream is perhaps available to them as well. This decision shows that if you're undocumented and you work incredibly hard at school, support yourself with the jobs available to you (likely hard labor), successfully navigate the bureaucratic labyrinth of US immigration paperwork, patiently wait roughly 20 years for a visa, endure insults for trying to escape economic hardship by coming to the US, and are incredibly lucky – you might get a license so that one day you may have the chance to actually use what you worked so hard to learn to benefit the country you have come to call home.  The seemingly insurmountable obstacles are precisely what gives undocumented immigrants like Sergio a piece of ownership in the American Dream, as it did the Irish immigrants, German immigrants, Chinese immigrants, etc. If anyone could do it, it wouldn't be a dream. If it didn't represent a brutal work ethic and hefty dose of luck, it wouldn't be a dream. And it if it were impossible, it wouldn't be the American Dream.  Despite the obvious odds stacked against them, many undocumented immigrants are justifiably feeling encouraged by Sergio's success. There are two other similar cases to Sergio's: one in Florida and one in New York, both involving undocumented immigrants who hope to gain admission to a state bar. The California supreme court decision could be a sign of what's to come for these cases and future ones as well. But for now, there are a large number of undocumented immigrants who, through the DREAM Act (a proposal to provide permanent residency to young undocumented immigrants who meet a number of requirements) and other venues hope to one day hold professional licenses in the country they call home. There's now an entire organization (that filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Sergio Garcia) called DREAM Bar Association that aims to support undocumented law students and lawyers – another sign that we can expect to see many others attempt to follow in the footsteps of Sergio.  I hope we see many more Sergios, in part because I simply believe people who work hard to be capable of doing a valuable job should get to actually do that job, and in part because if my life is ever in the hands of a doctor, lawyer, engineer, etc. I'm not going to care about his immigration status, but how well he or she can do the job.
Shamaine Daniels and Michael Ramos-Lynch: The real message from California's supreme court ruling is the US needs to get moving on comprehensive immigration reform