Search

Begin New Search Topic Immigration Journal Journal on Migration and Human Security

1. Ten Likely Changes to Immigration Policy Under Trump 2.0

Author:
Elizabeth Carlson and Charles Wheeler
Publication Date:
12-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
During his first administration, former President Trump adopted aggressive anti-immigrant policies, which included family separation, a ban on individuals from Muslim-majority countries, stringent border policies like the Remain in Mexico and Title 42, and attempted terminations of programs such as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for several national groups. Attorneys and representatives for immigrants had some success in pushing back against the administration’s most extreme measures through litigation and advocacy. Should they return to the White House, Trump and his supporters have promised to enact an even more draconian anti-immigrant agenda, including a commitment to conducting the largest mass deportation in U.S. history, ending birthright citizenship (which is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment), and revoking humanitarian protections for those already in the United States. Many of these efforts, of course, will be challenged in court. This article summarizes 10 likely immigration initiatives under a second Trump administration. It seeks to educate members of the public who value the crucial role and myriad contributions of immigrants and refugees — past and present — in the United States. It will also outline how advocates can fight to protect their clients from these measures.
Topic:
Immigration, Donald Trump, Deportation, and Immigration Policy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2. What Will It Take to Eliminate the Immigration Court Backlog? Assessing “Judge Team” Hiring Needs Based on Changed Conditions and the Need for Broader Reform

Author:
Donald Kerwin
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
This paper examines the staffing needs of the US Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), as it seeks to eliminate an immigration court backlog, which approached 2.5 million pending cases at the end of fiscal year (FY) 2023. A previous study by the Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS) attributed the backlog to systemic, long-neglected problems in the broader US immigration system. This paper provides updated estimates of the number of immigration judges (IJs) and “judge teams” (IJ teams) needed to eliminate the backlog over ten and five years based on different case receipt and completion scenarios. It also introduces a data tool that will permit policymakers, administrators and researchers to make their own estimates of IJ team hiring needs based on changing case receipt and completion data. Finally, the paper outlines the pressing need for reform of the US immigration system, including a well-resourced, robust, and independent court system, particularly in light of record “encounters” of migrants at US borders in FY 2022 and 2023.
Topic:
Immigration, Courts, Borders, Asylum, and Department of Homeland Security
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

3. Service Needs, Context of Reception, and Perceived Discrimination of Venezuelan Immigrants in the United States and Colombia

Author:
Carolina Scaramutti, Renae Danielle Schmidt, and Seth Schwartz
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
Millions of Venezuelans have fled their country in hopes for a better future outside the political and financial turmoil in their home country. This paper examines the self-reported needs of Venezuelans in the United States and Colombia. Specifically, it looks at perceived discrimination in each country and its effect on the service needs of Venezuelan immigrants. The authors used data from a larger project conducted in October to November 2017 to perform a qualitative content analysis on the specific services that participants and others like them would need following immigration. The sample consisted of 647 Venezuelan immigrant adults who had migrated to the United States (n = 342) or Colombia (n = 305). Its findings indicate statistically significant differences between the two countries. Venezuelan immigrants in the United States were more likely to identity mental health and educational service needs, while those in Colombia were more likely to list access to healthcare, help finding jobs, and food assistance. When looking at perceived discrimination, means scores for discrimination were significantly greater for participants who indicated needing housing services, who indicated needing assistance enrolling children in school and who indicated needing food assistance, compared to participants who did not list those needs. Venezuelans who had experienced greater negative context of reception were less likely to indicate needing mental health services, where 11.9 percent of those who did not perceive a negative context of reception responded that they needed mental health services. Evaluating existing service networks will be essential in working to bridge the gap between the services provided to and requested by Venezuelans. Collaboration between diverse government actors, community-based organizations (CBOs) and other stakeholders can help identify gaps in existing service networks. CBOs can also facilitate communication between Venezuelan immigrants and their new communities, on the need to invest in necessary services.
Topic:
Immigration, Discrimination, Services, and Adaptation
Political Geography:
Colombia, South America, Venezuela, and United States of America

4. Access to Justice, the Rule of Law, and Due Process in the US Immigration System: A Tribute to Juan Osuna

Author:
Donald Kerwin
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
This paper introduces a special collection of papers on access to justice, the rule of law, and due process in the US immigration system. The collection honors Juan Osuna, a devoted public servant and former director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which is the agency in the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that administers the Immigration Courts, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), and legal orientation, assistance, and representation programs. The collection consists of five articles published in the Journal on Migration and Human Security and six CMS essays, written by some of Osuna’s close colleagues and friends. Section I provides a brief biography of Juan Osuna’s life, recites his titles and professional accomplishments, and outlines his views on some of the topics covered in the papers. The section draws heavily from two events that book-ended Osuna’s tenure as EOIR Director, which were organized by the Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS). The first took place on February 16, 20121 and the second on July 18, 2017,2 just before Osuna’s untimely death at the age of 54 on August 15, 2017. This section also includes remembrances and reflections from Osuna’s colleagues at a November 15, 2018 event in Washington, DC, devoted to honoring his legacy.3 Section II summarizes the 11 papers in this collection, which reflect Juan Osuna’s commitment to humanizing the law and its fair application to all. The papers examine and propose ways to strengthen: • The nation’s response to large-scale migration. • The US asylum system. • The removal adjudication system. • Immigration Court backlog reduction efforts. • The treatment of survivors of human trafficking and modern-day slavery. • Due process for immigrants through legal representation. Section III offers a concluding reflection on the rule of law, and Juan Osuna’s legacy in a time of political division and discord.
Topic:
Immigration, Courts, Rule of Law, Asylum, and Due Process
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

5. The US Immigration Courts, Dumping Ground for the Nation’s Systemic Immigration Failures: The Causes, Composition, and Politically Difficult Solutions to the Court Backlog

Author:
Donald Kerwin and Richard Millet
Publication Date:
06-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
The US immigration court system seeks to “fairly, expeditiously, and uniformly administer and interpret US immigration laws” (DOJ 2022a). It represents the first exposure of many immigrants to due process and the rule of law in the United States, and occupies an integral role in the larger US immigration system. Yet it labors under a massive backlog of pending cases that undermines its core goals and objectives. The backlog reached 1.87 million cases in the first quarter of FY 2023 (Straut-Eppsteiner 2023, 6). This paper attributes the backlog to systemic failures in the broader immigration system that negatively affect the immigration courts, such as: • Visa backlogs, United States Citizen and Immigration Services (USCIS) application processing delays, and other bottlenecks in legal immigration processes. • The immense disparity in funding between the court system and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agencies that feed cases into the courts. • The failure of Congress to pass broad immigration reform legislation that could ease pressure on the enforcement and court systems. • The lack of standard judicial authorities vested in Immigration Judges (IJs), limiting their ability to close cases; pressure parties to “settle” cases; and manage their dockets. • The absence of a statute of limitations for civil immigration offenses. • Past DHS failures to establish and adhere to enforcement priorities and to exercise prosecutorial discretion (PD) throughout the removal adjudication process, including in initial decisions to prosecute. • The location of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which oversees US immigration courts, within the nation’s preeminent law enforcement agency, the Department of Justice (DOJ). • The misconception of many policymakers that the court system should primarily serve as an adjunct to DHS. • A past record of temporary judge reassignments and government shutdowns. The paper supports a well-resourced and independent immigration court system devoted to producing the right decisions under the law. Following a short introduction, a long section on “Causes and Solutions to the Backlog” examines the multi-faceted causes of the backlog, and offers an integrated, wide-ranging set of recommendations to reverse and ultimately eliminate the backlog. The “Conclusion” summarizes the paper’s topline findings and policy proposals.
Topic:
Immigration, Courts, Asylum, and Visa
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. In 2019, the US Undocumented Population Continued a Decade-Long Decline and the Foreign-Born Population Neared Zero Growth

Author:
Robert Warren
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
This report presents new estimates of the undocumented population residing in the United States in July 2019, by country of origin and state of residence. The Center for Migration Studies (CMS) derived the estimates by analyzing data collected in the annual American Community Survey (ACS) conducted by the US Census Bureau (Ruggles et al. 2020). The methodology used to estimate the undocumented population is described in the Appendix. The report highlights an aspect of population change — the number leaving the population — that is often overlooked in discussions of immigration trends. The report shows that the annual numbers leaving the population, especially through return migration to Mexico, have been the primary determinant of population change in the undocumented population in the past decade. Increasing numbers leaving the population have also led to near-zero growth of the total foreign-born population, which grew by just 20,000 from July 2018 to June 2019, the slowest growth in that population in more than a half-century.
Topic:
Migration, Immigration, Borders, and Undocumented Population
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

7. A Virus Without Papers: Understanding COVID-19 and the Impact on Immigrant Communities

Author:
Elizabeth Kiester and Jennifer Vasquez-Merino
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the inequalities facing vulnerable populations: those living in economically precarious situations and lacking adequate health care. In addition, frontline workers deemed essential to meet our basic needs have faced enormous personal risk to keep earning their paychecks and the economy running. Immigrant communities face an intersection of all three vulnerabilities (e.g., economic precarity, health care barriers, essential workforce), making them one of the most vulnerable populations in the United States. We conducted 26 interviews via Zoom with immigrant service providers in Pennsylvania and New York, including lawyers, case workers, religious leaders, advocates, doctors, and educators in order to gain a better understanding of the impact of COVID-19 on immigrant communities. These interviews affirmed that immigrants are concentrated in essential industries, which increases their exposure to the virus. In addition, they lack access to social safety nets when trying to access health care or facing job/income loss. Last, COVID-19 did not adequately slow the detention and deportation machine in the United States, which led to increased transmission of the virus among not only detainees but also others in the detention system, surrounding communities, and the countries to which people were deported, countries that often lacked an adequate infrastructure for dealing with the pandemic. Based on our interviews, we have a series of specific policy recommendations to diminish the vulnerability of immigrants and create social safety nets that will include them and protect them when the market fails to do so. Immigrants of all types have made indispensable contributions to the US economy during the pandemic and before it. First, Congress and states should pass legislation to provide COVID-19 relief payments to all essential workers, regardless of their status, as compensation for putting their lives on the line to keep the economy running. Second, as a public health imperative, federal and state governments should expand coverage of Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Programs (CHIP) to include immigrant essential workers and their children, regardless of their status. Third, DHS should not refer essential workers to removal proceedings, and immigration courts should terminate all removal proceedings for essential workers without criminal records. When it comes to issues of health care affordability and access, Congress must continue to revise the Affordable Healthcare Act to expand coverage for those who do not qualify for Medicaid but earn too little to afford insurance on their own. Finally, there must be a review and rigorous enforcement of workplace health and safety standards, particularly when it comes to farming, meatpacking, food production, and food service industries. Our final recommendations are specific to DHS and two of the primary agencies they oversee: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Border Patrol. First, there needs to be a review of ICE policies and practices, leading to a shift in policy that keeps mixed-status families intact and minor children out of detention centers and that streamlines and expands the asylum process. Second, both Congress and the administration must create additional paths to legal status where none now exist, including for recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and for children who have arrived since June 2007.
Topic:
Immigration, Borders, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

8. Statelessness in West Africa: An Assessment of Stateless Populations and Legal, Policy, and Administrative Frameworks in Ghana

Author:
Raymond Atuguba, Francis Xavier, and Vitus Gbang
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
Drawing on qualitative interviews that are complemented by the analysis of government policy documents, this study examines statelessness in Ghana. It addresses a range of policy, legal, institutional, administrative, and other politico-socioeconomic matters attendant to the concept. The study defines statelessness in its strict legal sense. It recognizes populations at risk of statelessness that may be restricted from benefiting from the protection and privileges of their host state. Persons identified by the study as stateless or at risk of statelessness include persons from traditionally nomadic migratory communities, former refugees, persons residing in border communities, members of Zongo communities, trafficked persons, and those affected by gaps in previous constitutions. The study also identifies the consequences of statelessness, including lack of access to healthcare, education, justice, and work. The study offers several recommendations to prevent and reduce statelessness in Ghana.
Topic:
Migration, Immigration, and Fragile States
Political Geography:
Africa and Ghana

9. What’s Wrong with Temporary Protected Status and How to Fix It: Exploring a Complementary Protection Regime

Author:
Bill Frelick
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
Temporary Protected Status (TPS) became part of the US protection regime in 1990 to expand protection beyond what had been available under the US Refugee Act of 1980, which had limited asylum to those who met the refugee definition from the United Nations’ 1951 Refugee Convention. The TPS statute authorized the attorney general to designate foreign countries for TPS based on armed conflict, environmental disasters, and other extraordinary and temporary conditions that prevent designated nationals from returning in safety. While providing blanket protection that very likely has saved lives, TPS has nonetheless proven to be a blunt instrument that has frustrated advocates on both sides of the larger immigration debate. This article evaluates the purpose and effectiveness of the TPS statute and identifies inadequacies in the TPS regime and related protection gaps in the US asylum system. It argues that TPS has not proven to be an effective mechanism for the United States to protect foreigners from generalized conditions of danger in their home countries. It calls for changing the US protection regime to make it more responsive to the risks many asylum seekers actually face by creating a broader “complementary protection” standard and a more effective procedure for assessing individual protection claims, while reserving “temporary protection” for rare situations of mass influx that overwhelm the government’s capacity to process individual asylum claims. The article looks at alternative models for complementary protection from other jurisdictions, and shows how the US asylum and TPS system (in contrast to most other jurisdictions) fails to provide a mechanism for protecting arriving asylum seekers who do not qualify as refugees but who nevertheless would be at real risk of serious harm based on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment or because of situations of violence or other exceptional circumstances, including natural or human-made disasters or other serious events that disturb public order, that would threaten their lives or personal security. The article proposes that the United States adopt an individualized complementary protection standard for arriving asylum seekers who are not able to meet the 1951 Refugee Convention standard but who would face a serious threat to life or physical integrity if returned because of a real risk of (1) cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; (2) violence; or (3) exceptional situations, for which there is no adequate domestic remedy.
Topic:
Immigration, Border Control, Citizenship, and Domestic Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Central America, and North America

10. The Use of Executive Orders and Proclamations to Create Immigration Policy: Trump in Historical Perspective

Author:
Michele Waslin
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
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.
Topic:
Immigration, Border Control, Domestic Politics, and Federalism
Political Geography:
United States, North America, Washington, and D.C.