My understanding is that $1,000 is paid on application for the Z visa. The other $4,000 is due if one later applies for permanent residency (you will hear the polls mysteriously refer to "pay a fine" and "then they pay *another* fine", which is merely what I describe above).
Having said that, you would be correct that the $1,000 is the only provision that makes this "not an amnesty" (and that is by a very strict definition of the word "amnesty"). If the $1,000 paid on Z visa application wasn't required, it would be an amnesty by any definition.
The foregoing is IMO a debatable and even marginal argument that "it's not amnesty", but they have gotten to lead on that debate and it may be difficult to convince anyone they're lying and misleading the public (which they are).
Still there is this: the bill prohibits local LEOs from asking anyone, anything about their legal status.
Coupled with that is any illegal brought to immigration court for deportation hearing must be offered a Z visa if they are eligible (and almost everyone is, or can make themselves eligible simply by giving a fake name and getting some simple false documentation about employment and residence). The court is also obligated to provide assistance in preparing the application for a Z visa.
Basically, illegal entry laws are eviscerated by the above laws and by the Z visa, and for an entire class of people.
IMO that's amnesty.
If the $1,000 is paid for the application for a visa, then it’s a fee, not a fine. If it’s a fee, then it’s not a penalty. If it’s not a penalty, then it HAS to be amnesty, because it is removing the current penalty for illegally entering this country - deportation.
That’s why it’s amnesty. Well, that and the fact that businesses that have hired those illegals in the past would no longer face any sort of penalty for their criminal acts. That’s a second amnesty.
