At its meeting earlier this month, the San Diego Human Relations Commission unanimously voted to support federal legislation that calls for the United States to lift a ban on HIV-positive people visiting the country.

City commissioner, Nicole Murray-Ramirez, who chairs the Human Relations Commission and also serves on the board of the National Gay & Lesbian task Force, headquartered in Washington D.C., spoke at a rally in Canada on March 16, urging officials to support the repeal of the travel regulations originally enacted in 1987 and explicitly restated when congress reformed immigration laws in the early 1990s.

“What would Jesus say today of America not allowing people living with HIV/AIDS to enter our cities or indeed be welcomed to our nation,” Murray-Ramirez said, noting the symbolism of the rally, which took place on Palm Sunday. In the Bible, Palm Sunday is recognized as the day Jesus entered Jerusalem and was welcomed by hundreds.

Canadian citizens, HIV/AIDS leaders, activists and public officials attended the gathering in Vancouver, British Columbia, to draw attention to the law referred to as “Draconian” by those in attendance.

“This is an example of bad policy with its foundation in fear and uncertainty,” said Canadian Member of Parliament, Bill Siksay, who was contacted by a Canadian citizen denied entry into the United States when U.S. immigration officials discovered that he was HIV-positive.

According to Siksay, the problem goes beyond citizens just crossing the border.

He said the policy is nothing new for Canadians who are living with AIDS or who are HIV-positive.

Despite efforts from the public health community to remove the law several times, since 1993, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) has designated HIV as grounds for inadmissibility to the United States. A cumbersome waiver option is available to those wishing to enter the country, but the process is incredibly restrictive, with 12 proposed requirements of visitors that have HIV.

President Bush acknowledged that the waiver system was a problem on World AIDS Day in 2006 when he asked the Department of Homeland Security to streamline the process. However, the proposed regulations are arguably more restrictive and intrusive.

The most egregious hurdles include: disclosure of HIV status to consular officials in the individual’s home country; certification that the individual has all medication necessary for the duration of their stay in the U.S., certification that no symptoms are being exhibited, and a commitment to avoid all high-risk behavior while in the U.S.

Siksay, urged legislators on both sides of the U.S.-Canadian border to support a bill introduced by Sen. John Kerry earlier this year that would strike the HIV restrictions from the INA and ask for a full review of the public health aspects of travel and immigration restrictions against those with HIV.

“Because these restrictions are a vestige of a period which was a difficult time, but has long past, there is no need to have a lingering sense of the unknown when it comes to dealing with this particular disease we have learned so much about,” Siksay said. He said such laws not only bar people from everyday interaction with friends and family members across the Canada-U.S. border, they create travel nightmares when visiting other countries.

“Its been a dilemma for lots of folks not only at border crossings, but often times they have to reroute a trips so they don’t have a stopover in the U.S,” he said.

Siksay, who along with other activists on both sides of the border have contacted U.S. and Canadian politicians to ask for their support in repealing the ban.

“The United States is only one of 13 countries that have such a ban,” said Helen Kennedy, the executive director of EGALE, the largest Canadian national GLBT civil rights organization.

“From our perspective this is not just a queer issue because this crosses anybody who is infected with HIV/AIDS falls under this ban which we believe to be pretty much outdated,” she said.

Though the travel ban amendment is attached to a more widely supported AIDS bill, supporters were cautiously optimistic that the ban will be lifted with the introduction of the Kerry bill, now that it has passed the subcommittee and is on the Senate floor.

“When you look at what other countries maintain it, by anyone’s assessment they are not countries that are progressive in any way shape or form. It’s sad to see the United States in the company of those other countries when it comes to public policy,” Siksay said.

In 2006, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS said that “there is no public health rationale for restricting liberty of movement or choice of residence on the grounds of HIV status.”

Still, even if Congress removes the anti-HIV language from the immigration law, it would fall to the Health and Human Services Department to decide whether HIV should remain on the list of diseases that bar entry to the U.S.

Health and Human Services officials did not return calls to comment on the ban.

Locally, however, the San Diego Human Relations Commission – which advises the Mayor and City Council on methods to assure that all city residents have equal access to economic, political and educational opportunities and equal access to service protection and accommodation in all businesses and public agencies – will be urging officials at city, state and national levels to support the repeal of the ban.

Officials from Mayor Jerry Sanders’ office said that because the ban is a federal issue the mayor has not taken a side on it position, and likely will not until it is sent to the City Council to do so.

Councilmember Toni Atkins remarked on the travel ban saying, “I don’t support discrimination in any form.”