With the immigration law, who will be deported? Who will no longer be able to enter France?

Gérald Darmanin's immigration bill is being examined in the Senate.

With the immigration law, who will be deported? Who will no longer be able to enter France?

Gérald Darmanin's immigration bill is being examined in the Senate. The text aims to facilitate the expulsions of certain immigrants and to improve the integration of other foreigners, but certain articles are debated. Who could stay in France if the text is voted on?

After numerous postponements, the immigration bill has finally arrived in the Senate. The legislative journey is, however, far from over, because the text fails to achieve a clear majority. Hoping to have his bill adopted, Gérald Darmanin simplified the line of his text indicating that it is a question of “being kind to the good guys, and mean to the bad guys”. Understand: facilitate the expulsions of delinquent immigrants and develop an “integration component” for working immigrants.

The immigration bill leans seriously towards the right with repressive measures or limiting the issuance of residence permits, but it has a guarantee to satisfy the left wing of the majority: article 3. A point which is all likewise too much for the right. Who are the foreigners who could be expelled, prevented from entering or on the contrary regularized with the immigration bill? Explanations

Carrying out evictions more easily: this is one of the main ambitions of the bill presented by Gérald Darmanin. The minister proposes to push delinquent immigrants out of the country, particularly those who have been convicted of misdemeanors or crimes punishable by 10 years of imprisonment, or even 5 years in the event of repeat offenses.

Other foreigners, who have not committed any wrongdoing, but represent a “serious threat to public order or state security” could be threatened with expulsion and expelled more easily. This would notably involve a reduction in protections such as the abolition of the protection of removal which currently prohibits the expulsion of an individual who entered French soil before the age of 13. A case reminiscent of that of the attacker of the Arras attack, listed as S for radicalization, who could not be deported because he arrived in France in his early childhood. Still in connection with the Arras attack, the Minister of the Interior wants foreigners who "adhere to a radical jihadist ideology" to have their residence permit withdrawn and can therefore be expelled after the adoption of his draft law.

Expulsion measures could also be facilitated by more recurring issuance of obligations to leave French territory (OQTF) against asylum seekers. The bill provides for an OQTF to be issued from the first rejection of an asylum application and before appeals can be made. These OQTFs, once issued, require the individual to leave France by their own means within 30 days before the expulsion is, theoretically, carried out.

If the immigration bill considers the expulsions of certain foreigners, it also plans to tighten the criteria allowing the issuance of residence permits and therefore to limit the share of immigrants regularized in France. This limitation would involve a three-fold reduction in the possible appeals for asylum seekers who would see their request rejected: they would only be able to use 4 appeals compared to 12 currently.

The Senate Law Committee has made some additions to this aspect of the immigration bill: the tightening of the criteria necessary for family reunification, with in particular a strengthening of the conditions of residence and resources of the applicant, and the establishment of " migration quotas. This last measure would give Parliament the right to determine "the number of foreigners admitted to settle permanently in France" per year.

With so many measures intended to limit the number of regularized immigrants in France or to expel foreigners in an irregular situation, the Minister of the Interior addresses the right but distances himself from the left wing of the presidential majority. To attract the votes of the latter, he thought of article 3 of the bill which would make it possible to issue a residence permit to immigrants in an irregular situation but working in "professions in tension", - the list of professions must be updated but would include restoration, cleaning, construction or agriculture.

These residence permits would be valid for one year and renewable as long as the conditions are met. According to Gérald Darmanin, this measure would lead to the issuance of 7,000 to 8,000 titles, more or less the equivalent of what the Valls circular allows for the regularization of a foreigner through work. Foreign graduates working in the health field could also receive a “talent – ​​medical and pharmacy professions” residence permit to meet the recruitment needs of qualified people in this sector.

However, the right is firmly opposed to this article and the big heads of the party such as Bruno Retailleau, president of the LR group in the Senate, have assured that the right will not vote for the bill if this article 3 is maintained. But in the event of withdrawal of the text, it is part of the majority which promises to no longer support the text stripped of this measure for the regularization of immigrants. The solution of extracting article 3 and making it a circular or a decree seems to satisfy the right but can it be enough to keep the votes of the entire majority? It is a dilemma on which Gérald Darmanin must satisfy all parties to avoid a forced passage of his bill with 49.3, a maneuver which could risk leading to a motion of censure from the Republicans capable of overthrowing the government.