scholarly journals Immigration and the War on Crime: Law and Order Politics and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrisia Macías-Rojas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Illegal Immigration ◽  
Mass Incarceration ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Enforcement ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
War On Crime ◽  
Policy Arena

The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) was a momentous law that recast undocumented immigration as a crime and fused immigration enforcement with crime control (García Hernández 2016; Lind 2016). Among its most controversial provisions, the law expanded the crimes, broadly defined, for which immigrants could be deported and legal permanent residency status revoked. The law instituted fast-track deportations and mandatory detention for immigrants with convictions. It restricted access to relief from deportation. It constrained the review of immigration court decisions and imposed barriers for filing class action lawsuits against the former US Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). It provided for the development of biometric technologies to track “criminal aliens” and authorized the former INS to deputize state and local police and sheriff's departments to enforce immigration law (Guttentag 1997a; Migration News 1997a, 1997b, 1997c; Taylor 1997). In short, it put into law many of the punitive provisions associated with the criminalization of migration today. Legal scholars have documented the critical role that IIRIRA played in fundamentally transforming immigration enforcement, laying the groundwork for an emerging field of “crimmigration” (Morris 1997; Morawetz 1998, 2000; Kanstroom 2000; Miller 2003; Welch 2003; Stumpf 2006). These studies challenged the law's deportation and mandatory detention provisions, as well as its constraints on judicial review. And they exposed the law's widespread consequences, namely the deportations that ensued and the disproportionate impact of IIRIRA's enforcement measures on immigrants with longstanding ties to the United States (ABA 2004). Less is known about what drove IIRIRA's criminal provisions or how immigration came to be viewed through a lens of criminality in the first place. Scholars have mostly looked within the immigration policy arena for answers, focusing on immigration reform and the “new nativism” that peaked in the early nineties (Perea 1997; Jacobson 2008). Some studies have focused on interest group competition, particularly immigration restrictionists’ prohibitions on welfare benefits, while others have examined constructions of immigrants as a social threat (Chavez 2001; Nevins 2002, 2010; Newton 2008; Tichenor 2009; Bosworth and Kaufman 2011; Zatz and Rodriguez 2015). Surprisingly few studies have stepped outside the immigration policy arena to examine the role of crime politics and the policies of mass incarceration. Of these, scholars suggest that IIRIRA's most punitive provisions stem from a “new penology” in the criminal justice system, characterized by discourses and practices designed to predict dangerousness and to manage risk (Feeley and Simon 1992; Miller 2003; Stumpf 2006; Welch 2012). Yet historical connections between the punitive turn in the criminal justice and immigration systems have yet to be disentangled and laid bare. Certainly, nativist fears about unauthorized migration, national security, and demographic change were important factors shaping IIRIRA's criminal provisions, but this article argues that the crime politics advanced by the Republican Party (or the “Grand Old Party,” GOP) and the Democratic Party also played an undeniable and understudied role. The first part of the analysis examines policies of mass incarceration and the crime politics of the GOP under the Reagan administration. The second half focuses on the crime politics of the Democratic Party that recast undocumented migration as a crime and culminated in passage of IIRIRA under the Clinton administration. IIRIRA's criminal provisions continue to shape debates on the relationship between immigration and crime, the crimes that should provide grounds for expulsion from the United States, and the use of detention in deportation proceedings for those with criminal convictions. This essay considers the ways in which the War on Crime — specifically the failed mass incarceration policies — reshaped the immigration debate. It sheds light on the understudied role that crime politics of the GOP and the Democratic Party played in shaping IIRIRA — specifically its criminal provisions, which linked unauthorized migration with criminality, and fundamentally restructured immigration enforcement and infused it with the resources necessary to track, detain, and deport broad categories of immigrants, not just those with convictions.

scholarly journals The problem of refugees in migration policy as a factor of Latin American region: political-geographic analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-45
Author(s):  
Oleg Tkach ◽  
Аnatoly Tkach ◽  
Anastasiia Shtelmashenko
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
Public Information ◽  
The United States ◽  
Border Security ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
Latin American Region

Formulation of the problem: evolutions of immigration policy, you can trace the history of the United States, since immigration policy is inextricably linked with the domestic and foreign policy of the country, as well as with most of the critical issues facing society. In January, 2018, President Donald Trump announced a "Framework on Immigration Reform and Border Security" which proposed replacing DACA with a "path to citizenship for approximately 1,8 million individuals". Purpose of the research: рrosperity аgenda is policy analysis тhe global struggle with Illegal migration, imigration reform, рolicy сoherence for development, мigration in an interconnected world: new directions for action, politics of мigration: Obama’s.мanaging оpportunity, сonflict and сhange Research methods: The following research methods were used to address the issues set in the article: general scientific methods - descriptive, hermeneutic-political, systemic, structural-functional, comparative, institutional-comparative; general logical methods – empirical, statistical, prognostic modeling and analysis; special methods of political science. The preference was given to the method of political-system analysis, by which the common and distinctive characteristics of the basic components of immigration policy strategies were identified, reflecting existing political, public, information and other challenges for international relations and global development. The article of analysis. This proposal has been met with a mixed reception, but immigration featured prominently in the president’s 2018 State of the Union speech. In the United States of America, immigration reform is a term widely used to describe proposals to maintain or increase legal immigration while decreasing illegal immigration, such as the guest worker proposal supported by President George W. Bush, and the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization or "Gang of Eight" bill which passed the U.S. Senate in June 2013.

scholarly journals Separated Families: Barriers to Family Reunification after Deportation

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 401-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah A. Boehm
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Family Reunification ◽  
Ethnographic Research ◽  
Transnational Families ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
Humanitarian Crisis ◽  
Mixed Status ◽  
Legal Barriers

This paper outlines the complexities — and unlikelihood — of keeping families together when facing, or in the aftermath of deportation. After discussing the context that limits or prevents reunification among immigrant families more generally, I outline several of the particular ways that families are divided when a member is deported. Drawing on case studies from longitudinal ethnographic research in Mexico and the United States, I describe: 1) the difficulties in successfully canceling deportation orders, 2) the particular limitations to family reunification for US citizen children when a parent is deported, and 3) the legal barriers to authorized return to the United States after deportation. I argue that without comprehensive immigration reform and concrete possibilities for relief, mixed-status and transnational families will continue to be divided. Existing laws do not adequately address family life and the diverse needs of individuals as members of families, creating a humanitarian crisis both within and beyond the borders of the United States. The paper concludes with recommendations for immigration policy reform and suggestions for restructuring administrative processes that directly impact those who have been deported and their family members.

scholarly journals Illegal Immigration, State Law, and Deterrence

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 228-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Hoekstra ◽  
Sandra Orozco-Aleman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Illegal Immigration ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Law ◽  
Undocumented Workers ◽  
Sb 1070 ◽  
Border Towns ◽  
Do So ◽  
Unique Dataset

A critical immigration policy question is whether state and federal policy can deter undocumented workers from entering the United States. We examine whether Arizona SB 1070, arguably the most restrictive and controversial state immigration law ever passed, deterred entry into Arizona. We do so by exploiting a unique dataset from a survey of undocumented workers passing through Mexican border towns on their way to the United States. Results indicate the bill's passage reduced the flow of undocumented immigrants into Arizona by 30 to 70 percent, suggesting that undocumented workers from Mexico are responsive to changes in state immigration policy. (JEL J15, J18, J61, K37)

Book Reviews

2011 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 456-457
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
New Era ◽  
Mcgill University

Jennifer Hunt of McGill University reviews “Beside the Golden Door: U.S. Immigration Reform in a New Era of Globalization” by Pia M. Orrenius and Madeline Zavodny. The EconLit Abstract of the reviewed work begins “Presents an alternative immigration policy for the United States that focuses on admitting the workers most valued by the market in a way that minimizes adverse effects on U.S. workers and funnels migration gains to U.S. taxpayers. Discusses the challenge--picking up the pieces; the goal--pro-growt….”

Conclusion

No Man's Land ◽  
2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cindy Hahamovitch
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Collective Bargaining ◽  
Government Intervention ◽  
Illegal Immigration ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
Foreign Labor ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 1950S

This concluding chapter considers the possibilities for change and improvement over current iterations of guestworker programs in the United States. If the history of guestworkers in the country demonstrates anything, this chapter argues, it is that guestworker programs are not an alternative to illegal immigration. Rather, the two systems of recruiting foreign labor have always existed in symbiosis. But can such an oppressive situation be reformed? The chapter turns to a few solutions; such as the adoption of the European guestworker programs of the 1950s and 1960s, collective bargaining and advocacy work, government intervention and worker vigilance, and finally and most importantly, immigration reform.

Prosecutors and the Immigration Enforcement System in the United States

2021 ◽  
pp. 430-446
Author(s):  
Jennifer Chacón
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Law ◽  
Immigration Enforcement ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Criminal Convictions ◽  
Different Types ◽  
State Prosecutors

The interdependence of criminal enforcement and immigration enforcement systems in the United States now takes several different forms, each with implications for criminal prosecutors. Over time, federal officials have increased the number of immigration prosecutions they pursue in a given year. The immigration consequences of criminal convictions have expanded and intensified. Some state criminal prosecutors have used their charging authority to supplement the immigration enforcement efforts of the federal government, while others have applied the criminal law of the state in ways that mitigate the immigration effects of a criminal conviction. Finally, federal immigration law gives state prosecutors the authority to designate non-citizen victims of certain crimes for specialized visas that protect them from removal. These different types of interactions between criminal enforcement and immigration enforcement make state prosecutors important players in federal immigration policy and practice.

Weeping in the Playtime of Others: The Obama Administration's Failed Reform of ICE Family Detention Practices

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dora Schriro
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Terrorist Attack ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Enforcement ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
Obama Administration ◽  
Immigration And Customs Enforcement ◽  
Immigrant Detention ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Trump Administration

The United States has long struggled with the practice of detaining immigrant families and over time, most reform efforts have flagged, if not failed. This paper examines the impact of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) through an exploration of the evolution of the family residential center (FRC) for families in immigration custody, established prior to the 9/11 terrorist attack by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), and expanded by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in its aftermath. The paper provides an inside look at how policymakers, at various points in the Obama administration, sought to roll back its most infirm practices and the fate of those efforts. It begins with a brief history of family detention in the United States, continues with a summary of the reforms undertaken both early and late in the Obama administration, and examines the significant challenges it faced and the less progressive positions it adopted during its first and second terms in office.The paper concludes with a discussion of reasons for the rapid reversal of its previous reforms and provides recommendations to achieve a civil, civil system of immigration enforcement for families and all others, which means nothing less than the transformation of the immigrant detention system from a criminal to a civil paradigm, consistent with the population and legal authorities.[1] The need for such an effort is all the more urgent in light of executive actions taken in the early days of the Trump administration and their initial outcomes. Among those thwarting admissions are  orders to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to seal the US borders, shun refugees fleeing from war-torn regions until “extreme vetting” measures are put into place, and reassess others who have already been issued visas.  Additional orders issued to ICE expanded and expedited the removal of persons whose conduct could result in charges or convictions as well as those with criminal charges or convictions, resulting in a 38 percent increase in arrests by ICE agents within the first 100 days of the Trump administration (Dickerson 2017b; Duara 2017).        [1] For further discussion of the concept of a civil, civil system of immigration enforcement, see Schriro (2009).

scholarly journals Moving beyond Comprehensive Immigration Reform and Trump: Principles, Interests, and Policies to Guide Long-Term Reform of the US Immigration System

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 541-576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Kerwin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigrant Integration ◽  
Immigration Policies ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Immigration

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.

Fear of Immigration Enforcement Among Older Latino Immigrants in the United States

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (6) ◽  
pp. 986-1014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nestor Rodriguez ◽  
Cristian L. Paredes ◽  
Jacqueline Hagan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Latino Immigrants ◽  
Immigration Enforcement ◽  
Immigration Reform ◽  
Foreign Born ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Permanent Residence ◽  
Older Immigrants

Objective: The passage of the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) and other subsequent restrictive immigration policies have created fear among Latino immigrants. This study examines whether fear of immigration enforcement is socially significant among older (50+ years) foreign-born Latino individuals in the United States without citizenship or permanent residence, and whether disapproval of immigrant enforcement policies is directly associated with fear of immigration enforcement among this older population. Method: Data used in the analysis come from 2007, 2008, 2010, and 2013 national Latino surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center. Cross-sectional regression models are used to estimate the probabilities of fearing immigration enforcement in the Latino samples, as well as to examine the association between disapproval and fear of immigration enforcement. Results: The study finds that the predicted probabilities of fearing immigration enforcement among foreign-born individuals aged 50 and over without citizenship or permanent residence are not negligible. Moreover, the study finds evidence of a direct association between the disapproval of enforcement measures and fear of immigration enforcement. Discussion: Restrictive immigration measures have implications for conditions of fear and other stressors affecting the well-being of older immigrants.

scholarly journals Immigration Policy and the Rise of Self-Employment among Mexican Immigrants

ILR Review ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 001979392110577
Author(s):  
Catalina Amuedo-Dorantes ◽  
Magnus Lofstrom ◽  
Chunbei Wang
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Mexican Immigrants ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Enforcement ◽  
Demographic Groups ◽  
Self Employment ◽  
Alternative Livelihood ◽  
The Us ◽  
Dramatic Growth

The recent dramatic growth in self-employment among Mexican immigrants in the United States in the past two decades is a puzzling trend, in stark contrast to the stagnant growth or even decline among other demographic groups. The authors propose that the expansion of interior immigration enforcement, a characteristic of the US immigration policy during that time span, contributed to this unique trend by pushing Mexican immigrants into self-employment as an alternative livelihood. Exploiting temporal and geographic variation in immigration enforcement measures from 2005 to 2017, the authors show that tougher enforcement has been responsible for approximately 15% of the rise in Mexican self-employment in the United States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document