North America

Author(s):  
Andrew Geddes

While there is no formalized regional migration governance in North America and little prospect of it developing, there are powerful regionalized effects linked to US hegemony and the interest of US capital. Understandings and representations of migration in the US governance system have had powerful regional effects and shaped responses in both Canada and Mexico. An increased focus on the deterrence that existed prior to the 9/11 terror attacks of 2001 has shaped regionalized responses. The election of Donald Trump as president in 2016 brought nativist and racist rhetoric to US immigration policy and to relations with its neighbours, but ramped up provisions that, unwilling as he was to admit it, were already well established.

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 482-492
Author(s):  
Julie Avril Minich

Abstract With US immigration policy seeming ever more brutal with each new headline, it becomes increasingly tempting to advocate for the rights of migrants and asylum seekers by presenting the current situation as extraordinary and questioning the legitimacy of the Trump administration’s border enforcement tactics. Jay Timothy Dolmage, Katherine Benton-Cohen, and Beth Lew-Williams, however, show that the contemporary moment is far from exceptional; rather, immigration restriction in North America has long mobilized exclusionary nativist logics and shifting constructions of legality. Timely without being ripped from the headlines, their latest books offer much-needed historical context for a current humanitarian crisis along with important lessons from previous crises.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-105
Author(s):  
Guadalupe Correa-Cabrera

The present article analyzes the responses to US border security policies and particularly US immigration policy by activists, migrants, and progressive actors during the Trump era. It explains new forms of popular resistance in the US and south of its border, as well as their effects in national politics, policies and geopolitics. This analysis focuses on migrant caravans and related protest movements. Finally, this article provides preliminary explanations of such phenomena that include considerations of geopolitics, philanthropy, and the plausible utilization of counterinsurgency tactics.


Subject Regional migration issues. Significance Mexican President-elect Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) on October 3 said US President Donald Trump “looks favourably” on his plans to stem northward migration by promoting economic development in Central America. The remarks followed a call between the leaders that Trump described as “great”, with the US president adding that “we will work well together”. Whether such goodwill will last is doubtful, particularly regarding the issue of migration, on which the leaders have thus far taken diametrically opposed stances. Impacts Increased migration from Nicaragua and Venezuela could test stability in Costa Rica and Panama. Global warming will hit Central America hard, with droughts and flooding affecting food security, fuelling migration. Toughened security on the US-Mexico border will make people smuggling highly profitable for crime cartels.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Waslin

Executive Summary This article examines presidential immigration policy making through executive orders (EOs) and proclamations. Donald Trump’s overall volume of EOs has been remarkably similar to that of other presidents, while his number of proclamations has been relatively high. His immigration-related EOs and proclamations, however, diverge from those of his predecessors in several ways. Of the 56 immigration-related EOs and 64 proclamations issued since 1945, Trump has issued 10 and nine, respectively. Overall, about 1 percent of all EOs and proclamations during this period have been immigration related, compared to 8 percent of Trump’s EOs and 2.4 percent of Trump’s proclamations. In a sharp departure from previous presidents, a greater share of his EOs and proclamations have been substantive policy-making documents intended to restrict admissions of legal immigrants and increase enforcement along the border and in the interior of the United States. This article explores Trump’s unorthodox use of executive tools to make immigration policy, circumventing Congress and even members of his own administration. It recommends that: Congress should hold oversight hearings and should consider revoking or modifying EOs and proclamations that have been issued pursuant to the authority provided to the president by Congress, as opposed to those based on the executive’s constitutional authority. Advocacy organizations should continue to challenge the president’s executive actions, the insufficient process and consultation leading to them, their statutory or constitutional justification, and their impact. Congress should take an inventory of the immigration authorities it has delegated, both explicitly and implicitly, to the executive branch and determine when this authority can and should be limited. Congress should pass legislation to update and reform the US immigration system, and thus clarify its intentions regarding US immigration law, policy, and executive authority in this area.


2021 ◽  
Vol 111 (2) ◽  
pp. 580-608
Author(s):  
Ran Abramitzky ◽  
Leah Boustan ◽  
Elisa Jácome ◽  
Santiago Pérez

Using millions of father-son pairs spanning more than 100 years of US history, we find that children of immigrants from nearly every sending country have higher rates of upward mobility than children of the US-born. Immigrants’ advantage is similar historically and today despite dramatic shifts in sending countries and US immigration policy. Immigrants achieve this advantage in part by choosing to settle in locations that offer better prospects for their children. (JEL J15, J18, J62, K37, N31, N32)


Author(s):  
Rebecca Dirksen

I promised a story that does not end, and find myself caught up in that very spiral. Travay la pa janm fini; istwa pa kanpe nan wout. The work is never finished; history does not stop in the middle of the road. The wisdom in this proverb was made evident when, on January 11, 2018, US President Donald Trump evidently dismissed Haiti, El Salvador, and nations of Africa as “shithole countries” while arguing with the US Congress over immigration policy. The remark was unceremoniously delivered one day prior to the eight-year anniversary of the January 12, 2010, earthquake. It was a deeply wounding ...


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 541-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Kerwin

This paper introduces a special collection of 15 papers that chart a course for long-term reform of the US immigration system. The papers look beyond recent legislative debates and the current era of rising nationalism and restrictionism to outline the elements of a forward-looking immigration policy that would serve the nation's interests, honor its liberal democratic ideals, promote the full participation of immigrants in the nation's life, and exploit the opportunities offered by the increasingly interdependent world. This paper highlights several overarching themes from the collection, as well as dozens of proposals for reform. Together, the papers in the collection make the case that: • Immigration policymaking should be embedded in a larger set of partnerships, processes, and commitments that respond to the conditions that force persons to migrate. • The US immigration system should reflect liberal democratic values and an inclusive vision of national identity. • It is incumbent on policy and opinion makers to publicize the broad national interests served by US immigration policies. • Policymakers should, in turn, evaluate and adjust US immigration policies based on their success in furthering the nation's interests. • The United States should prioritize the gathering and dissemination of the best available evidence on migration and on the nation's migration-related needs and programs, and should use this information to respond flexibly to changing migration patterns and new economic developments. • Immigrant integration strengthens communities and represents an important, overarching metric for US immigration policies. • The successful integration of the United States' 43 million foreign-born residents and their progeny should be a national priority. • An immigration federalism agenda should prioritize cooperation on shared federal, state, and local priorities. • An immigration federalism agenda should recognize the federal government's enforcement obligations; the interests of local communities in the safety, well-being and participation of their residents; the importance of federal leadership in resolving the challenges posed by the US undocumented population; and the need for civil society institutions to serve as mediators of immigrant integration. • Immigration reform should be coupled with strong, well-enforced labor standards in order to promote fair wages and safe and healthy working conditions for all US workers. • Fairness and due process should characterize US admission, custody, and removal decisions. • Family unity should remain a central goal of US immigration policy and a pillar of the US immigration system. • The United States should seek to craft “win-win” immigration policies that serve its own interests and that benefit migrant-sending states. • US immigration law and policy should be coherent and consistent, and the United States should create legal migration opportunities for persons uprooted by US foreign interventions, trade policies, and immigration laws. • The United States should reduce the size of its undocumented population through a substantial legalization program and seek to ensure that this population never again approximates its current size.


2016 ◽  
Vol 115 (778) ◽  
pp. 75-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Shifter

Washington's policy of isolating Cuba succeeded only in alienating most of Latin America. Obama's new course has been welcomed, though other irritants, such as US immigration policy, remain.


2021 ◽  
Vol VI (I) ◽  
pp. 287-297
Author(s):  
Sadia Fayaz ◽  
Nasrullah Khan

The policies formed by US leadership play a vital role in establishing US hegemony all over the world. The foreign policy of a state made according to the national interest. A rational decision of a leader plays a vital role in the effectiveness of the foreign policy. The challenges faced by Barack Obama in 2008 were somehow different from the challenges faced by Trump in 2016. The comparative analysis of both foreign policies would make it easy to determine the right and wrong decision taken by both leaders. The changing circumstances of the world would be identified through this research paper. The world is moving towards multipolarity, and somehow the decisions taken by Trump after his incumbent of office had the worst impact on US foreign policy because Trump was trying to isolate the US from world affairs, including trade and security.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document