Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:36 pm
Time: 9:36 pm
Results for undocumented immigrants
81 results foundAuthor: Jacques, Genevieve Title: United States - Mexico Walls, Abuses, and Deaths at the Borders Flagrant Violations of the Rights of Undocumented Migrants on their Way to the United States Summary: There are few places in the world where tensions, due to mass migration of population in the globalization era, are as outrageous as in the geographical area that extends from Central America to the south of The United States. This space, comprising Mexico and its southern and northern borders, is a customary route followed by poor people who walk and travel overland to get to the territory and labor market of the United States. This area also traces the breakpoint line between a rich and dominant America, in economic and political terms, and a poor America that is subject to the game rules established by its northern neighbor. The borders, intended to establish the limits of national sovereignty, are the place where the main contradictions between the logics of global liberal economy, one of the main migration causes, and national policies to handle this migration flows take place, almost in a caricature way. Beyond the hydraulic metaphors of migration flows or currents, we have to remember that we are talking about human beings who take part in survival strategies but who are also victims of contradictions, inconsistencies and injustices of the region’s migration policies in force. The price they have to pay, in economic terms but especially in terms of suffering, humiliation and violation of their human rights and dignity, are very high, at the level of the extreme tensions prevailing in this part of the world. The following three figures give an idea of the extension and seriousness of the phenomenon: - In 2006, Mexican authorities questioned and deported 179,000 foreigners in transit for the United States (94 percent from Central America); - During the same year, Border Patrols of the United States deported 858,000 foreigners to their home country, between which 514,000 Mexicans, and immigration services apprehended and deported about 50,000 migrants from other Central American countries. It is estimated that, during the last 12 years, over 4,000 migrants died crossing the “wall” (both physical and virtual) that separates Mexico from the United States, this is 15 times more the number of people who died crossing the Berlin Wall during the 28 years it existed. Since new border control measures were established by United States authorities in 2001, the number of deaths has increased dramatically and reached 473 in 2005, from which 260 occurred in Arizona’s desert. According to authorities and to most of the mass media, these migrants are “illegal”. We do not agree with the use of this term, which leads to saying that human beings are illegal. The “illegality” is created by migration policies that do not correspond with reality. Furthermore, this adjective entails a tendency to criminalize immigration, making migrants that enter national territories, without all their administrative papers in order, pass for “criminals”. This semantic transfer is often accompanied by a real amalgam between migrants, undocumented people and terrorists. This evolution, particularly obvious since the current United States’ administration assumed office, has severe consequences because it leads the public opinion to legitimize the most repressive measures in the name of national security and to divert its attention from the violations of this population’s main human rights. Details: Paris: FIDH, 2008. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 29, 2011 at: http://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/USAMexiquemigran488ang.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United States URL: http://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/USAMexiquemigran488ang.pdf Shelf Number: 121196 Keywords: Border ControlBorder SecurityHuman RightsIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrationUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Martinez, Daniel E. Title: A Continued Humanitarian Crisis at the Border: Undocumented Border Crosser Deaths Recorded by the Pima County Office of the Medical Examiner, 1990-2012 Summary: This report analyzes the numeric trends and demographic characteristics of the deaths of undocumented border crossers in the area covered by the Pima County Office of the Medical Examiner which is located in the city of Tucson, Arizona. This office provides medico-legal death investigation for the western two-thirds of the Tucson Sector’s southern border with Mexico (Anderson 2008) and has been the office responsible for the examination of over 95% of all migrant remains discovered in Arizona since 2003 (Coalición de Derechos Humanos 2013). The data for this report come from the Pima County Office of the Medical Examiner. Details: Tucson, AZ: The Binational Migration Institute, The University of Arizona, 2013. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 6, 2013 at: http://bmi.arizona.edu/sites/default/files/border_deaths_final_web.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://bmi.arizona.edu/sites/default/files/border_deaths_final_web.pdf Shelf Number: 128974 Keywords: Border SecurityIllegal Immigrants (U.S.)Immigration PoliciesMigrant DeathsUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Frydman, Lisa Title: A Treacherous Journey: Child Migrants Navigating the U.S. Immigration System Summary: A Treacherous Journey: Child Migrants Navigating the U.S. Immigration System addresses the issues raised by the recent historic and unabated increase in the number of children coming unaccompanied - without a parent or legal guardian - to the United States. From 6,000-8,000 unaccompanied children entering U.S. custody, the numbers surged to 13,625 in Fiscal Year 2012 and 24,668 in Fiscal Year 2013. The government has predicted that as many as 60,000 or more unaccompanied children could enter the United States in Fiscal Year 2014. These children come from all over the world, but the majority arrive from Mexico and Central America, in particular the Northern Triangle countries of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. Children come unaccompanied to the United States for a range of reasons. Numerous reports and the children themselves say that increasing violence in their home communities and a lack of protection against this violence spurred them to flee. Children also travel alone to escape severe intrafamilial abuse, abandonment, exploitation, deep deprivation, forced marriage, or female genital cutting. Others are trafficked to the United States for sexual or labor exploitation. Upon arrival, some children reunite with family members they have not seen in many years, but their migration is often motivated by violence and other factors, in addition to family separation. Their journeys may be as harrowing as the experiences they are fleeing, with children often facing sexual violence or other abuses as they travel. The children's challenges continue when U.S. immigration authorities apprehend them, take them into the custody of the federal government, and place them in deportation proceedings. There, they are treated as "adults in miniature" and have no right to appointed counsel and no one to protect their best interests as children in the legal system. In addition, existing forms of immigration relief do not provide sufficient safeguards to protect against deportation when it is contrary to their best interests. Details: San Francisco: Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, University of California Hastings College of the Law; Washington, DC: Kids in Need of Defense, 2014. 104p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 28, 2014 at: http://www.uchastings.edu/centers/cgrs-docs/treacherous_journey_cgrs_kind_report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.uchastings.edu/centers/cgrs-docs/treacherous_journey_cgrs_kind_report.pdf Shelf Number: 132011 Keywords: Child ProtectionIllegal ImmigrationsImmigrant ChildrenImmigration EnforcementRunawaysUnaccompanied ChildrenUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: New Zealand. Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) Title: Temporary Migrants as Vulnerable Workers: A Literature Review Summary: The vulnerability of temporary migrants in the labour market is a policy issue that has received attention from a mix of international agencies (eg, the International Labour Organization (ILO), United Nations (UN) and European Union) and those responsible for migrant welfare locally (governments and non-governmental organisations). This report reviews the available international and New Zealand research on temporary migrants' vulnerability and exploitation in the workplace. In particular, the review highlights research gaps and whether there are effective interventions that mitigate the vulnerability of temporary migrant workers. There is considerable and growing literature on immigration to New Zealand on the nature of labour market flow composition through to the process of settlement and labour market outcomes for a variety of migrant groups. In the wake of the 1986/87 changes to immigration policy and another round of changes just after 2000, immigration has become a significant contributor to labour supply. However, much of the focus has been on permanent migration and its outcomes. As this review makes clear, temporary migration - which has become a much more substantial characteristic of the New Zealand migration system, including labour supply - has received much less attention. This report discusses the issue of vulnerability in terms of labour market engagement and whether some migrant workers are especially vulnerable in terms of their work situation or experiences. Vulnerability is especially connected to the precariousness of employment, although not all temporary migrant workers are vulnerable and not all suffer from disadvantages in the workplace. That said, literature shows that low skill and education levels contribute to vulnerability in the workplace and that being a migrant exacerbates this vulnerability. Details: Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, 2014. 142p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 10, 2014 at: http://www.dol.govt.nz/research/migration/pdfs/temporary-migrant-workers-literature-review-march2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.dol.govt.nz/research/migration/pdfs/temporary-migrant-workers-literature-review-march2014.pdf Shelf Number: 132061 Keywords: Migrant LaborMigrants Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Rosenblum, Marc R. Title: The Deportation Dilemma: Reconciling Tough and Humane Enforcement Summary: The United States has deported a record number of unauthorized immigrants and other removable noncitizens in recent years. More than 4.5 million noncitizens have been removed since Congress passed sweeping legislation in 1996 to toughen the nation's immigration enforcement system. The pace of formal removals has quickened tremendously, rising from about 70,000 in 1996 to 419,000 in 2012. This report analyzes the current pipelines for removal and key trends in border and interior apprehensions, deportations and criminal prosecutions. With the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the midst of a review of its deportation policies to see if they can be conducted "more humanely," the report also examines the policy levers the Obama administration has to influence deportation policies, practices and results. Using Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Naturalization Service data, the authors identify striking trends in the deportation system since 1996: - A fundamental shift from a deportation system focused on informal returns (voluntary return and departure) to one focused on formal removals, which have more severe consequences for those who are repatriated. - Major expansion in the use of nonjudicial removal procedures such as expedited removal and reinstatement of removal, in which immigration enforcement officers rather than immigration judges make deportation decisions. - Escalating criminalization, with a rising proportion of those apprehended at the Southwest border charged with immigration-related criminal offenses. The report explains that three factors have been the key drivers of major changes in deportation outcomes during the last two decades: new laws that expand the grounds for removal and speed the removals process; sizeable and sustained increases in immigration enforcement personnel, infrastructure, and technology; and operational and policy decisions by three successive administrations to shape enforcement outcomes. The report describes the actual state of U.S. immigration enforcement: Who is being deported and where and how are they being apprehended? It also explores how the current administration is carrying out its enforcement mandates. The Obama administration inherited - and expanded upon - unprecedented capacity to identify, apprehend, and deport unauthorized immigrants. Nearly as many people were formally deported during the first five years of the current administration (over 1.9 million) as during the entire eight years of the prior administration (2.0 million). What is new is that the Obama administration also has implemented prosecutorial discretion policies to focus enforcement efforts, even as the overall scope of enforcement has grown. These policies provide guidelines for exercising discretion not to deport certain people in cases that are outside established priority categories. Overall, enforcement at the border and within the United States show sharply different pictures. At the border, there is a near zero-tolerance system, where unauthorized immigrants are increasingly subject to formal removal and criminal charges. Within the country, there is greater flexibility, with priorities and resources focused on a smaller share of the population subject to removal. Such differences are consistent with the different goals and circumstances confronting border and interior enforcement. But the impacts of these differing systems have begun to converge, raising increasingly complex questions and choices for policymakers and the public. The research presented here highlights the deportation dilemma: that more humane enforcement is fundamentally in tension with stricter immigration control; and that a more robust enforcement system inevitably inflicts damage on established families and communities. Details: Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2014. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2014 at: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/deportation-dilemma-reconciling-tough-humane-enforcement Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/deportation-dilemma-reconciling-tough-humane-enforcement Shelf Number: 132208 Keywords: DeportationIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrationImmigration EnforcementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Flynn, Michael Title: How and Why Immigration Detention Crossed the Globe Summary: Today in countries across the globe, immigration-related detention has become an established policy apparatus that counts on dedicated facilities and burgeoning institutional bureaucracies. Before the decade of the 1980s, however, detention appears to have been largely an ad hoc tool, employed mainly by wealthy states in exigent circumstances. This paper details the history of key policy events that led to the diffusion of detention practices during the last 30 years and assesses some of the motives that appear to have encouraged this phenomenon. The paper also endeavors to place the United States at the center of this story because its policy decisions were instrumental in initiating the process of policy innovation, imitation, and - in many cases - imposition that has helped give rise to today's global immigration detention phenomenon. More broadly, in telling this story, this paper seeks to flesh out some of the larger policy implications of beyond-the-borders immigration control regimes. Just as offshore interdiction and detention schemes raise important questions about custody, accountability, and sovereignty, they should also spur questions over where responsibility for the wellbeing of migrants begins and ends. As this paper demonstrates, when it comes to immigration detention, all the answers cannot be found just at home. Details: Geneva, Switzerland: Global Detention Project, Programme for the Study of Global Migration, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, 2014. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Global Detention Project Working Paper No. 8: Accessed May 3, 2014 at: http://www.globaldetentionproject.org/fileadmin/publications/Flynn_diffusion_WorkingPaper_v2.pdf Year: 2014 Country: International URL: http://www.globaldetentionproject.org/fileadmin/publications/Flynn_diffusion_WorkingPaper_v2.pdf Shelf Number: 132215 Keywords: Illegal Aliens Immigrant Detention Immigrants ImmigrationImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Benton, Meghan Title: Spheres of Exploitation: Thwarting Actors Who Profit from Illegal Labor, Domestic Servitude, and Sex Work Summary: Large-scale migration flows are too often exploited by "bad actors" for profit-ranging from criminals who exploit trafficked people to employers who do not meet legal hiring practices. Even consumers, who may not know the source of their goods and services, sometimes aid the exploitation of migrants. This report analyzes such exploitation in three spheres: the domestic care sector, the labor market, and the sex industry. Across all three, perpetrators are broadly motivated by the lure of high profits and low risks. The report, part of a Transatlantic Council on Migration series on migration "bad actors," details several obstacles governments face in their efforts to weaken such actors: victims may be unwilling to report crimes, the crimes themselves fall into a gray area in which identification and prosecution are complex, and the leaders of criminal organizations often successfully protect themselves from enforcement efforts by implicating their foot soldiers and victims in illegal activity. Policies to disrupt the business model of exploitation seek to increase risks and reduce profits for facilitators, and they may also aim to reduce the supply and demand of exploitable labor. Most policies carry risks and practical challenges. One of the main legal tools-anti-trafficking legislation-aims to increase the risks of severe exploitation, but low prosecution rates and trivial sentences reduce their utility as a deterrent. Measures that target employers also face several challenges, such as proving employer guilt and administering high-enough fines. Increasing subcontractors' regulations, if successfully implemented, can raise standards across the board, but may also inadvertently lead to more severe exploitation (and more illegal immigration) if some operators are pushed underground. The report argues that one of the biggest challenges facing law enforcement is that the focus on serious criminals and lawbreakers ignores those who operate on the edge of legality; the reality is that creative criminal organizations exploit legal routes wherever possible, sometimes flying under the radar of police. This situation often creates unexpected results. Some policies to encourage legal migration-like those that tie workers to a particular employer-can facilitate exploitative practices, while policies designed to reduce exploitation (such as licensing systems) might make some operators more likely to hire unauthorized workers. Details: Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2014. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2014 at: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/migration-exploitation-illegal-labor-domestic-servitude-sex Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/migration-exploitation-illegal-labor-domestic-servitude-sex Shelf Number: 132222 Keywords: Border SecurityDomestic WorkersForced LaborHuman TraffickingIllegal ImmigrantsSexual ExploitationUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Papademetriou, Demetrios G. Title: A Strategic Framework for Creating legality and Order in Immigration Summary: "Immigration harms" undermine the positive economic and social benefits of immigration and in some cases produce economic and social costs that may outweigh the benefits of migration. These risks of migration are extensive, and they include the exploitation of workers, the erosion of working standards, the presence of illegally resident persons that undermine the rule of law, profit to criminal enterprises, government corruption, potential adverse fiscal and welfare consequences, and-at their most severe-violent criminal activity. This report, part of a Transatlantic Council on Migration series that examines migration "bad actors," analyzes how governments ought to best allocate their resources to address these harms, including choosing which threats to tackle and where to prioritize enforcement efforts. The report explores how immigration policymakers can learn from other public policy regulation efforts to ensure that regulatory actions advance the public interest. After assessing a wide range of tools that immigration policymakers have at their disposal, the report concludes that an effective and strategic enforcement regime to tackle immigration harms includes: (1) the abiilty of governments to generate new evidence and analysis to improve their operational understanding of the threats they face; (2) an allocation of resources the scale and intensity of the violations, as well as the cost-effectiveness of policies designed to address them; (3) strong partnerships across government agencies; and (4) decisions based on transparent criteria that all participants in the system can understand. Details: Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2014. 25p.; Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2014 at: http://www.fosterquan.com/content/documents/policy_papers/2014/MPI_Legality_and_Order.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.fosterquan.com/content/documents/policy_papers/2014/MPI_Legality_and_Order.pdf Shelf Number: 132224 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Smith, Nicola Title: 'Donkey Flights': Illegal Immigration from the Punjab to the United Kingdom Summary: This report, written by journalist Nicola Smith, sketches one immigration loophole into Europe: so-called "donkey flights" by which Indian migrants obtain a tourist visa for a Schengen-zone country in order to enter the United Kingdom through the back door. The report is based on an undercover expose of Punjabi visa agencies by The Sunday Times, and from interviews conducted with migrants, law enforcement officers, and senior officials in India and Europe. The report identifies several trends. First, thousands of visa agencies operate in the Punjab region alone, with varying degrees of legality. Some agencies, while breaking no rules, charge disproportionate fees for visas that could be obtained directly from the relevant embassy. Some operate in legally grey areas, such as by advising migrants on how to bend the rules. More underground operations have links to criminal smuggling networks across Europe. Second, the scale of this migration challenge facing the UK government is considerable. Push factors such as low wages and high unemployment combine with the lure of vast earnings overseas. Many are desperate to migrate, whether legally or illegally, and are attracted by word of mouth "success stories." Even migrants who have been deported look for alternative ways to return. Third, developing effective policies is difficult. The illegal immigration industry is flexible and adaptable, responding quickly to legislative changes. By contrast, government bureaucracy can only slowly change its rules and practices. Closing one loophole can mean another is opened elsewhere. Details: Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2014. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 3, 2014 at: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/donkey-flights-illegal-immigration-punjab-united-kingdom Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/donkey-flights-illegal-immigration-punjab-united-kingdom Shelf Number: 132231 Keywords: Border ControlIllegal ImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyMigrationUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Matthews, Adrian Title: "What's Going to Happen Tomorrow?" Unaccompanied Children Refused Asylum Summary: This report brings together a range of concerns that the Office of the Children's Commissioner has had for a number of years about how unaccompanied children navigate the asylum system they are channelled through when seeking permission (leave) to remain in the United Kingdom. The primary focus of the research for this report was on young people who had been unsuccessful in their asylum claims and who were now young adults (or on the cusp of becoming so).These young people are expected to leave the UK and return to their countries of origin - often war zones or countries whose Governments violate the rights of its citizens. Their voices and experiences feature throughout. The report is presented in two halves. Part 1 defines what is meant by unaccompanied children, provides an overview of their numbers in Europe and the UK, and looks at what happens to those whose claims are unsuccessful. It also considers care arrangements and the impact of how losing their asylum claim affected their status in the care system. The final chapter in part 1 reviews the legal assistance available to help children and young people put their cases before decision makers. At the end of part 1 we make a series of recommendations to Government, the Legal Aid Agency and others designed to allow children to participate fully and have their voice heard in legal proceedings that affect their lives and outcomes. Part 2 focuses on what young people told us about their journey from leaving their own country to final refusal of asylum, and the barriers they face in returning home. It highlights what would be good practice for agencies in dealing with unaccompanied children in the asylum system. The conclusion of this report considers how the Government might reconfigure current arrangements for those who do not meet the stringent criteria for asylum to provide a more realistic prospect of them leaving the UK at an appropriate time. The approach builds on discussions that have emerged in Europe suggesting that young migrants should be permitted to remain in the host state to complete a life project that prepares them for return to their country of origin or moving on elsewhere. At the end of part 2 we make a series of recommendations on how this may be achieved. Details: London: Office of the Children's Commissioner, 2014. 106p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 8, 2014 at: http://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/content/publications/content_794 Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/content/publications/content_794 Shelf Number: 132295 Keywords: Asylum SeekersChild ProtectionUndocumented ChildrenUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Martinez, Daniel E. Title: Bordering on Criminal: The Routine Abuse of Migrants in the Removal System. Part II: Possessions Taken and Not Returned Summary: This report focuses on the issue of repatriated migrants' belongings being taken and not returned by U.S. authorities. Overall, we find that the taking of belongings and the failure to return them is not a random, sporadic occurrence, but a systematic practice. One indication of this is that just over one-third of deportees report having belongings taken and not returned. Perhaps one of the most alarming findings is that, among deportees who were carrying Mexican identification cards, 1 out of every 4 had their card taken and not returned. The taking of possessions, particularly identity documents, can have serious consequences and is an expression of how dysfunctional the deportation system is. Our study finds that migrants processed through Operation Streamline, or held in detention for a week or longer, are most likely to have their possessions taken and not returned. Details: Washington, DC: Immigration Policy Center, American Immigration Council, 2013. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Special Report: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/ipc/Border%20-%20Possessions%20FINAL.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/ipc/Border%20-%20Possessions%20FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 132341 Keywords: Immigrant Detention Immigrants Immigration Immigration EnforcementOperation StreamlineUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Manuel, Kate M. Title: Immigration Detainers: Legal Issues Summary: An "immigration detainer" is a document by which U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) advises other law enforcement agencies of its interest in individual aliens whom these agencies are detaining. ICE and its predecessor, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), have used detainers as one means of obtaining custody of aliens for removal proceedings since at least 1950. However, the nationwide implementation of the Secure Communities program between 2008 and 2013 has prompted numerous questions about detainers. This program relies upon information sharing between various levels and agencies of government to identify potentially removable aliens. Detainers may then be issued for these aliens. Prior to 1986, the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) did not explicitly address detainers, and the INS appears to have issued detainers pursuant to its "general authority" to guard U.S. borders and boundaries against the illegal entry of aliens, among other things. However, in 1986, Congress amended the INA to address the issuance of detainers for aliens arrested for controlled substance offenses. After the 1986 amendments, INS promulgated two regulations, one addressing the issuance of detainers for controlled substance offenses and the other addressing detainers for other offenses. These regulations were merged in 1997 and currently address various topics, including who may issue detainers and the temporary detention of aliens by other law enforcement agencies. There is also a standard detainer form (Form I-247) that allows ICE to indicate that it has taken actions that could lead to the alien's removal, and request that another agency take actions that could facilitate such removal (e.g., notify ICE before the alien's release). Some commentators and advocates for immigrants' rights have asserted that, because the INA addresses only detainers for controlled substance offenses, ICE's detainer regulations and practices are beyond its statutory authority insofar as detainers are used for other offenses. A federal district court in California found otherwise in its 2009 decision in Committee for Immigrant Rights of Sonoma County v. County of Sonoma. However, subsequent litigation has raised the issue anew in other jurisdictions. Some have also suggested that a federal regulation - which provides that law enforcement agencies receiving immigration detainers "shall maintain custody of the alien for a period [generally] not to exceed 48 hours" - means that states and localities are required to hold aliens for ICE. Prior versions of Form I-247 may also have been construed as requiring compliance with detainers. However, in its recent decision in Galarza v. Szalczyk, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rejected this view. Instead, it adopted the same interpretation of the regulation that DHS has advanced, construing it as prescribing the maximum period of any detention pursuant to a detainer, rather than mandating detention. However, district courts in other jurisdictions have indicated that they view the regulation as requiring states and localities to hold aliens for ICE. In addition, questions have been raised about who has custody of aliens subject to detainers, and whether the detainer practices of state, local, and/or federal governments impinge upon aliens' constitutional rights. Answers to these questions may depend upon the facts and circumstances of particular cases. For example, courts have found that the filing of a detainer, in itself, does not result in an alien being in federal custody, although aliens could be found to be in federal custody if they are subject to final orders of removal. Similarly, courts may be less likely to find that the issuance of a particular detainer violates an alien's constitutional rights if a warrant of arrest in removal proceedings is attached to the detainer, than if the alien is held after he or she would have been released because ICE has reason to believe he or she is removable. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2014. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: R42690: Accessed May 15, 2014 at: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R42690.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R42690.pdf Shelf Number: 132374 Keywords: Illegal AliensImmigrant DetentionImmigrants and CrimeImmigrationUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: American Civil Liberties Union Title: Warehoused and Forgotten: Immigrants Trapped in Our Shadow Private Prison System Summary: In rural Texas, 3,000 men are locked inside a "tent city," sleeping in bunk beds spaced only a few feet apart. The tents are crawling with insects and the smell of broken, overflowing toilets. This is Willacy County Correctional Center: a physical symbol of everything that is wrong with enriching the private prison industry and criminalizing immigration. More than 25,000 low-security non-U.S. citizens languish at thirteen private prisons like Willacy under Criminal Alien Requirement (CAR) contracts. For years, these for-profit prisons have been able to operate in the shadows, effectively free from public scrutiny. That ends now. Our report documents the ACLU's multi-year investigation into the five CAR facilities in Texas. We uncovered evidence of shocking abuse and mistreatment, families torn apart, and the excessive use of solitary confinement. The second-class prisoners in CAR facilities are trapped at the intersection of three disturbing trends: the national mass incarceration crisis, prison privatization, and the criminalization of immigration. This is the story of how and why things have gotten so bad. Details: New York: ACLU, 2014. 104p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 17, 2014 at: https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/060614-aclu-car-reportonline.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/060614-aclu-car-reportonline.pdf Shelf Number: 132496 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DetentionPrison ConditionsPrivate PrisonsPrivatizationSolitary ConfinementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Wilber, Shannan Title: Noncitizen Youth in the Juvenile Justice System Summary: This publication provides a guide to working with noncitizen youth in the juvenile justice system. It promotes the adoption of policies and procedures for noncitizen youth that are consistent with the principles of detention and equity reform. The report includes an overview of noncitizen youth in the United States, a review of how immigration status might impact a juvenile justice case and an overview of the law with regards to the intersection between juvenile justice and immigration enforcement. This practice guide aims to assist jurisdictions in being more aware of the impact of immigration status and provide appropriate services to address this population's special needs. Details: Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2014. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: A Guide to Juvenile Detention Reform, No. 7: Accessed July 2, 2014 at: http://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-NoncitizenYouthintheJJSystem-2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-NoncitizenYouthintheJJSystem-2014.pdf Shelf Number: 132601 Keywords: Juvenile DetentionJuvenile ImmigrantsJuvenile OffendersUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Restrepo, Dan Title: The Surge of Unaccompanied Children from Central America. Root Causes and Policy Solutions Summary: Over the past few years, and in particular over the past few months, the number of children and families leaving the Central American countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras and arriving in neighboring countries and at our southern border has grown significantly. Already in fiscal year 2014, more than 57,000 children have arrived in the United States, double the number who made it to the U.S. southern border in FY 2013. The number of families arriving at the border, consisting mostly of mothers with infants and toddlers, has increased in similar proportions. In fiscal year 2013, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, apprehended fewer than 10,000 families per year; yet, more than 55,000 families were apprehended in the first nine months of fiscal year 2014 alone. The majority of unaccompanied children and families who are arriving come from a region of Central America known as the "Northern Triangle," where high rates of violence and homicide have prevailed in recent years and economic opportunity is increasingly hard to come by. Officials believe a total of at least 90,000 children will arrive on the U.S.-Mexico border by the end of this fiscal year in September. This brief aims to shed light on this complex situation by putting the numbers of people leaving the Northern Triangle into context; analyzing the broad host of drivers in Central America that have caused a significant uptick in children leaving their countries; and prescribing a series of foreign policy steps to facilitate management of this crisis and also to address the long-term root causes pushing these children to flee their home countries. This brief, however, does not delve into the needed domestic policy changes in the areas of immigration and refugee law. Details: Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2014. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 29, 2014 at: http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CentAmerChildren3.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CentAmerChildren3.pdf Shelf Number: 132808 Keywords: Asylum SeekersChild Protection ImmigrationUndocumented Children Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Seghetti, Lisa Title: Border Security: Immigration Inspections at Port of Entry Summary: About 362 million travelers (citizens and non-citizens) entered the United States in FY2013, including about 102 million air passengers and crew, 18 million sea passengers and crew, and 242 million incoming land travelers. At the same time about 205,000 aliens were denied admission at ports of entry (POEs); and about 24,000 persons were arrested at POEs on criminal warrants. (Not all persons arrested are denied admission, including because some are U.S. citizens.) Within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) Office of Field Operations (OFO) is responsible for conducting immigration inspections at America's 329 POEs. CBP's primary immigration enforcement mission at ports of entry is to confirm that travelers are eligible to enter the United States and to exclude inadmissible aliens. Yet strict enforcement is in tension with a second core mission: to facilitate the flow of lawful travelers, who are the vast majority of persons seeking admission. A fundamental question for Congress and DHS is how to balance these competing concerns. In general, DHS and CBP rely on "risk management" to strike this balance. One part of the risk management strategy is to conduct screening at multiple points in the immigration process, beginning well before travelers arrive at U.S. POEs. DHS and other departments involved in the inspections process use a number of screening tools to distinguish between known, low-risk travelers and lesser-known, higher-risk travelers. Low-risk travelers may be eligible for expedited admissions processing, while higher-risk travelers are usually subject to more extensive secondary inspections. As part of its dual mission, and in support of its broader mandate to manage the U.S. immigration system, DHS also is responsible for implementing an electronic entry-exit system at POEs. Congress required DHS' predecessor to develop an entry-exit system beginning in 1996, but the implementation of a fully automated, biometric system has proven to be an elusive goal. The current system collects and stores biographic entry data (e.g., name, date of birth, travel history) from almost all non-citizens entering the United States, but only collects biometric data (e.g., fingerprints and digital photographs) from non-citizens entering at air or seaports, and from a subset of land travelers that excludes most Mexican and Canadian visitors. With respect to exit data, the current system relies on information sharing agreements with air and sea carriers and with Canada to collect biographic data from air and sea travelers and from certain non-citizens exiting through northern border land ports; but the system does not collect data from persons exiting by southern border land ports and does not collect any biometric exit data. Questions also have been raised about DHS' ability to use existing entry-exit data to identify and apprehend visa over-stayers. The inspections process and entry-exit system may raise a number of questions for Congress, including in the context of the ongoing debate about immigration reform. What is the scope of illegal migration through ports of entry, and how can Congress and DHS minimize illegal flows without unduly slowing legal travel? Congress may consider steps to enhance POE personnel and infrastructure and to expand trusted travel programs. Congress also may continue to seek the completion of the entry-exit system, a program that has been the subject of ongoing legislative activity since 1996, as summarized in the appendix to this report. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2014. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: R43356: Accessed July 31, 2014 at: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43356.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43356.pdf Shelf Number: 132857 Keywords: Border Security (U.S.)Homeland SecurityIllegal ImmigrationImmigrationImmigration EnforcementRisk ManagementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Bush, Jeb Title: U.S. Immigration Policy Summary: Few issues on the American political agenda are more complex or divisive than immigration. There is no shortage of problems with current policies and practices, from the difficulties and delays that confront many legal immigrants to the large number of illegal immigrants living in the country. Moreover, few issues touch as many areas of U.S. domestic life and foreign policy. Immigration is a matter of homeland security and international competitiveness-as well as a deeply human issue central to the lives of millions of individuals and families. It cuts to the heart of questions of citizenship and American identity and plays a large role in shaping both America's reality and its image in the world. Immigration's emergence as a foreign policy issue coincides with the increasing reach of globalization. Not only must countries today compete to attract and retain talented people from around the world, but the view of the United States as a place of unparalleled openness and opportunity is also crucial to the maintenance of American leadership. There is a consensus that current policy is not serving the United States well on any of these fronts. Yet agreement on reform has proved elusive. The goal of the Independent Task Force on U.S. Immigration Policy was to examine this complex issue and craft a nuanced strategy for reforming immigration policies and practices. The Task Force report argues that immigration is vital to the long-term prosperity and security of the United States. In the global competition to attract highly talented immigrants, the United States must ensure that it remains the destination of first choice. The report also finds that immigrants, who bring needed language and cultural skills, are an increasingly important asset for the U.S. armed forces. What is more, allowing people to come to this country to visit, study, or work is one of the surest means to build friendships with future generations of foreign leaders and to show America's best face to the world. Details: Washington, DC: Council on Foreign Relations, 2009. 165p. Source: Internet Resource: Independent Task Force Report No. 63: Accessed July 31, 2014 at: http://www.cfr.org/immigration/us-immigration-policy/p20030 Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: http://www.cfr.org/immigration/us-immigration-policy/p20030 Shelf Number: 132861 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigration (U.S.)Immigration ReformUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: University of Nevada, Las Vegas. William S. Boyd School of Law, Thomas & Mack Legal Clinic, Immigration Clinic Title: The Conditions of Immigration Detention in Nevada: A Report on the Henderson Detention Center, November 19, 2013 Summary: The most recent statistics on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activity show that ICE detained 429,247 individuals during the 2011 fiscal year. Compared to the number of immigrants detained in the last twenty years, this represents an enormous expansion of efforts to physically contain immigrants. Indeed, from 1995 to 2009, ICE expanded its daily detention capacity by 400%. During the same timeframe, ICE removals skyrocketed by more than 700%. In other words, ICE has paired a massive expansion of detention with a focus on aggressive efforts to carry out deportations. This sudden and unprecedented expansion of ICE's power and responsibility has placed immigrants in a particularly vulnerable position. Aggressive prosecution and expanded use of detention has simply added to the well-documented vulnerabilities that tend to characterize immigrants as a group. In the United States, immigrants are more likely than those born in the U.S. to lag behind in education, have trouble speaking English, and to be in or near poverty. Moreover, immigrants are less likely to report when they are the victims of criminal and civil violations. These attributes are exacerbated by the fact that most immigrants in detention do not have ready access to counsel because they are often detained some distance from their homes (and population centers generally), and the U.S. removal system does not provide indigent detainees with counsel. ICE's rapid and aggressive expansion of detention and removal, combined with the inherent vulnerabilities of the undocumented population, has led to grave concerns about the treatment of detained immigrants. As a result, ICE's Office of Detention Oversight (ODO) has audited correctional facilities where immigration detainees are housed.13 Yet these efforts have not resolved concerns about immigration detention. This report represents an effort to examine immigration detention conditions in Nevada and determine whether improvements have occurred at the Henderson Detention Center (HDC) since ODO performed its audit of HDC in 2011. Details: Las Vegas: Immigration Clinic, Thomas & Mack Legal Clinic, William S. Boyd School of Law, 2013. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 22, 2014 at: http://www.knpr.org/son/images/people/immigrationdetentionnevada.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.knpr.org/son/images/people/immigrationdetentionnevada.pdf Shelf Number: 131908 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigrant Detention (Nevada)Immigration EnforcementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: No More Deaths Title: A Culture of Cruelty: Abuse and Impunity in Short-Term U.S. Border Patrol Custody Summary: In 2006, in the midst of humanitarian work with people recently deported from the United States to Nogales, Sonora, No More Deaths began to document abuses endured by individuals in the custody of U.S. immigration authorities, and in particular the U.S. Border Patrol. In September 2008 No More Deaths published Crossing the Line in collaboration with partners in Naco and Agua Prieta, Sonora. The report included hundreds of individual accounts of Border Patrol abuse, as well as recommendations for clear, enforceable custody standards with community oversight to ensure compliance. Almost three years later, A Culture of Cruelty is a follow-up to that report-now with 12 times as many interviews detailing more than 30,000 incidents of abuse and mistreatment, newly obtained information on the Border Patrol's existing custody standards, and more specific recommendations to stop the abuse of individuals in Border Patrol custody. The abuses individuals report have remained alarmingly consistent for years, from interviewer to interviewer and across interview sites: individuals suffering severe dehydration are deprived of water; people with life-threatening medical conditions are denied treatment; children and adults are beaten during apprehensions and in custody; family members are separated, their belongings confiscated and not returned; many are crammed into cells and subjected to extreme temperatures, deprived of sleep, and threatened with death by Border Patrol agents. By this point, the overwhelming weight of the corroborated evidence should eliminate any doubt that Border Patrol abuse is widespread. Still the Border Patrol's consistent response has been flat denial, and calls for reform have been ignored. We have entitled our report "A Culture of Cruelty" because we believe our findings demonstrate that the abuse, neglect, and dehumanization of migrants is part of the institutional culture of the Border Patrol, reinforced by an absence of meaningful accountability mechanisms. This systemic abuse must be confronted aggressively at the institutional level, not denied or dismissed as a series of aberrational incidents attributable to a few rogue agents. Until then we can expect this culture of cruelty to continue to deprive individuals in Border Patrol custody of their most fundamental human rights. Details: Tucson, AZ: No More Deaths, 2010. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 23, 2014 at: http://www.nomoredeathsvolunteers.org/Print%20Resources/Abuse%20Doc%20Reports/Culture%20of%20Cruelty/CultureofCrueltyFinal.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.nomoredeathsvolunteers.org/Print%20Resources/Abuse%20Doc%20Reports/Culture%20of%20Cruelty/CultureofCrueltyFinal.pdf Shelf Number: 133123 Keywords: Border Patrol (U.S.)Border SecurityHuman Rights AbusesIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DetentionImmigrationPrisoner AbuseUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: National Immigration Law Center Title: Inclusive Policies Advance Dramatically in the States. Immigrants' Access to Driver's Licenses, Higher Education, Workers' Rights and Community Policing Summary: As Congress debated federal immigration reform this year, states led the way by adopting policies designed to integrate immigrants more fully into their communities. In the wake of the 2012 elections, with Latino and Asian voters participating in record numbers, the 2013 state legislative sessions witnessed a significant increase in pro-immigrant activity. Issues that had been dormant or had moved in a restrictive direction for years, such as expanding access to driver's licenses, gained considerable traction, along with measures improving access to education and workers' rights for immigrants. States also began to reexamine the costs and consequences of anti-immigrant policies for their citizen and immigrant residents. Rather than promoting a larger role for states in immigration enforcement, proposals in several states sought to build trust between law enforcement and immigrant communities. Indeed, this year restrictive legislation was markedly absent; only one such measure - barring specific documents from being used to establish identity - became law. By contrast, eight states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico enacted laws providing access to driver's licenses regardless of immigration status, five states adopted laws or policies expanding access to higher education for immigrant students, and two states enacted a domestic workers' bill of rights. Most recently, California governor Jerry Brown signed a broad array of pro-immigrant measures that expand access to driver's licenses, protect the rights of immigrant workers, improve access to education, make law licenses available to eligible applicants regardless of their immigration status, and promote trust between immigrants and local law enforcement. In his signing statement, Governor Brown challenged federal inaction on immigration reform, saying, "While Washington waffles on immigration, California's forging ahead. I'm not waiting." This report summarizes the activity on immigrant issues that took place during the states' 2013 legislative sessions, as well as efforts to improve access to services for immigrant youth. Details: New York: National Immigration Law Center, 2013. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: http://www.nilc.org/pubs.html Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.nilc.org/pubs.html Shelf Number: 129926 Keywords: ImmigrantsImmigration (U.S.)Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Passel, Jeffrey S. Title: As Growth Stalls, Unauthorized Immigrant Population Becomes More Settled Summary: The number of unauthorized immigrants living in the United States has stabilized since the end of the Great Recession and shows no sign of rising, according to new Pew Research Center estimates. The marked slowdown in new arrivals means that those who remain are more likely to be long-term residents, and to live with their U.S.-born children. There were 11.3 million unauthorized immigrants living in the U.S. in March 2013, according to a preliminary Pew Research Center estimate, about the same as the 11.2 million in 2012 and unchanged since 2009. The population had risen briskly for decades before plunging during the Great Recession of 2007 to 2009. As growth of this group has stalled, there has been a recent sharp rise in the median length of time that unauthorized immigrants have lived in the U.S. In 2013, according to a preliminary estimate, unauthorized immigrant adults had been in the U.S. for a median time of nearly 13 years - meaning that half had been in the country at least that long. A decade earlier, in 2003, the median for adults was less than eight years. Details: Washington, DC: Pew Research Center's Hispanic Trends Project, 2014. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 2, 2014 at: http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2014/09/2014-09-03_Unauthorized-Final.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2014/09/2014-09-03_Unauthorized-Final.pdf Shelf Number: 133535 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigrants (U.S.)ImmigrationUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: American Immigration Council Title: Misplaced Priorities: Most Immigrants Deported by ICE in 2013 Were a Threat to No One Summary: No one can say with certainty when the Obama administration will reach the grim milestone of having deported two million people since the President took office in 2008. Regardless of the exact date this symbolic threshold is reached, however, it is important to keep in mind a much more important fact: most of the people being deported are not dangerous criminals. Despite claims by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that it prioritizes the apprehension of terrorists, violent criminals, and gang members, the agency's own deportation statistics do not bear this out. Rather, most of the individuals being swept up by ICE and dropped into the U.S. deportation machine committed relatively minor, non-violent crimes or have no criminal histories at all. Ironically, many of the immigrants being deported would likely have been able to remain in the country had the immigration reform legislation favored by the administration become law. ICE's skewed priorities are apparent from the agency's most recent deportation statistics, which cover Fiscal Year (FY) 2013. However, it takes a little digging to discern exactly what those statistics mean. The ICE report containing these numbers is filled with ominous yet cryptic references to "convicted criminals" who are "Level 1," "Level 2," or "Level 3" in terms of their priority. But when those terms are dissected and analyzed, it quickly becomes apparent that most of these "criminal aliens" are not exactly the "worst of the worst." Details: Washington, DC: American Immigration Council, Immigration Policy Center, 2014. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 2, 2014 at: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/misplaced_priorities_march_2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/misplaced_priorities_march_2014.pdf Shelf Number: 133553 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigrants (U.S.)Immigrants and CrimeImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Passel, Jeffrey S. Title: Unauthorized Immigrant Totals Rise in 7 States, Fall in 14 Summary: This report provides estimates of the 2012 unauthorized immigrant population and estimates of recent population trends in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. It also estimates national and state-level shares of unauthorized immigrants in the overall population, foreign-born population and labor force, and the share of students in kindergarten through 12th grade with at least one unauthorized immigrant parent. The report also includes estimates of the birth countries and regions of unauthorized immigrants at the state and national levels. Accompanying this report are interactive maps showing unauthorized immigrant population size, as well as shares of the overall population, shares of the foreign-born population and shares of the labor force, in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Additional interactive maps show the share of elementary and secondary school students with at least one unauthorized parent, and the share of Mexicans among unauthorized immigrants, by state. Another map displays change for 2009 to 2012 in the unauthorized immigrant population at the state level. The estimates use the "residual method," a widely accepted and well-developed technique based on official government data. The data come mainly from the American Community Survey and March Supplement to the Current Population Survey, conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. Details: Washington, DC: Pew Research Center's Hispanic Trends Project, 2014. 54p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 20, 2014 at: http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2014/11/2014-11-18_unauthorized-immigration.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2014/11/2014-11-18_unauthorized-immigration.pdf Shelf Number: 134168 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigration (U.S.)Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Gruben, William C. Title: "Illegal" Immigration on the U.S.-Mexico Border: Is It Really a Crisis? Summary: In recent months, print and television journalists have presented the American public with a "crisis" of illegal immigration on the U.S.-Mexico border. Much of this recent discussion has centered on Central American children traveling alone and on allegations that they are responding to motivations created by the Obama administration's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival policy. The word "crisis," however, can have alternative meanings. If a "crisis" of undocumented immigration means a historically large or very rapidly growing flow of undocumented immigrations, the overall national evidence shows today that there is no such crisis. Border Patrol apprehensions of undocumented immigrants attempting to cross the U.S.- Mexico border have in fact plummeted and remain far below levels a decade earlier. Nevertheless, apprehensions of children traveling alone have indeed surged. Many of these child immigrants are traveling alone from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. This flow of children from Central America requires careful examination, especially if compared to Mexico's numbers. Although Mexico's population is eight times Guatemala's, 15 times Honduras and 19 times El Salvador's, for example, the most recent partial-year apprehensions of unaccompanied children from each one of these countries have exceeded such apprehensions of children from Mexico. All this points to a surge of unaccompanied Central American children. But even this has to be qualified as a true crisis or not. While references to a record of apprehensions of unaccompanied child immigrants are correct, publicly available data for this category only go back to 2010. Thus, it may be preliminary to draw definitive conclusions about record numbers of unaccompanied children based on four full-fiscal-year observations plus monthly observations into a fifth year. Other data, including total apprehensions for any undocumented child immigrants, accompanied or otherwise, extend more than a decade. Preliminary estimates for fiscal year 2014 suggest that these apprehensions have remained below levels a decade earlier. Details: Houston, TX: James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, Rice University, 2014. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December a0, 2014 at: http://bakerinstitute.org/media/files/files/4d562970/MC-Immig-Gruben_Payan-101714.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://bakerinstitute.org/media/files/files/4d562970/MC-Immig-Gruben_Payan-101714.pdf Shelf Number: 134308 Keywords: Border ControlChild ImmigrantsIllegal ImmigrationUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: International Commission of Jurists Title: "Undocumented": Justice for Migrants in Italy: A mission report Summary: The objective of protecting human rights and upholding the rule of law in the context of migration has grown ever more challenging and in the face of burgeoning migration to the European Union (EU). In this regard, there is no doubt that Italy is now one of the most important gateways to the EU. In recent years, the central Mediterranean route has reclaimed its central role for migration travels to mainland EU countries, as appears clear from graph no. 1 comparing the number of transits through the different entry routes to the EU. The situation has been exacerbated in 2014, when, according to UNHCR, by 14 August 2014 the number of arrivals of migrants and asylum seekers had reached around 100,000 persons, more than double the total numbers of 2013 (see, graph no. 1). At least since 2008, the response of Italy to the increased numbers of migrant arrivals to its shores had been one of rejection, an approach best exemplified by the policy of push-backs on the high seas designed and implemented through the infamous 2008 Treaty on Friendship, Partnership and Cooperation with Libya during the reign of Muammar Gadaffi. Pursuant to that treaty, the Italian authorities began a practice of push-backs to Libya that was ultimately condemned by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the case Hirsi Jamaa and others v. Italy as a violation of the prohibition of collective expulsion, of the principle of non-refoulement and of the right to an effective remedy. Recently, fortunately, the situation on the high seas seemed to have improved. On 18 October 2013, Italy unilaterally activated the operation Mare Nostrum, through which the Italian military navy and aviation, the Carabinieri, the Guardia di Finanza, the Police, coastguard and the military personnel of the Italian Red Cross have been patrolling the high seas, but this time in order to rescue migrants in distress and to bring them ashore on Italian territory. Although the conduct of this ongoing operation is outside the scope of this report, the ICJ welcomes the efforts of Italy to save lives in the Mediterranean Sea under operation Mare Nostrum. Nonetheless, this laudable effort has naturally strained Italy's resources more than in the past. At its meeting with representatives of the Directorates of Civil Liberties and Immigration and of Public Security of the Italian Ministry of Interior, the mission heard that, at the time of the visit, there were some 47,000 persons held in reception centres and that the overall reception capacity of the country was overstretched. Details: Geneva, SWIT: International Commission of Jurists, 2014. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 29, 2015 at: http://www.refworld.org/pdfid/5452554a4.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Italy URL: http://www.refworld.org/pdfid/5452554a4.pdf Shelf Number: 134493 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DetentionMigrantsMigration (Italy)Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Hoekstra, Mark Title: Illegal Immigration, State Law, and Deterrence Summary: A critical immigration policy question is whether state and federal policy can deter undocumented workers from entering the U.S. 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 data set from a survey of undocumented workers passing through Mexican border towns on their way to the U.S. 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. In contrast, we find no evidence that the law induced undocumented immigrants already in Arizona to return to Mexico. Details: Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2014. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: NBER Working Paper No. 20801: Accessed January 31, 2015 at: http://www.nber.org/papers/w20801 Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w20801 Shelf Number: 134510 Keywords: Illegal Immigrants (U.S.)ImmigrationImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Siskin, Alison Title: Alien Removals and Returns: Overview and Trends Summary: The ability to remove foreign nationals (aliens) who violate U.S. immigration law is central to the immigration enforcement system. Some lawful migrants violate the terms of their admittance, and some aliens enter the United States illegally, despite U.S. immigration laws and enforcement. In 2012, there were an estimated 11.4 million resident unauthorized aliens; estimates of other removable aliens, such as lawful permanent residents who commit crimes, are elusive. With total repatriations of over 600,000 people in FY2013-including about 440,000 formal removals-the removal and return of such aliens have become important policy issues for Congress, and key issues in recent debates about immigration reform. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provides broad authority to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to remove certain foreign nationals from the United States, including unauthorized aliens (i.e., foreign nationals who enter without inspection, aliens who enter with fraudulent documents, and aliens who enter legally but overstay the terms of their temporary visas) and lawfully present foreign nationals who commit certain acts that make them removable. Any foreign national found to be inadmissible or deportable under the grounds specified in the INA may be ordered removed. The INA describes procedures for making and reviewing such a determination, and specifies conditions under which certain grounds of removal may be waived. DHS officials may exercise certain forms of discretion in pursuing removal orders, and certain removable aliens may be eligible for permanent or temporary relief from removal. Certain grounds for removal (e.g., criminal grounds, terrorist grounds) render foreign nationals ineligible for most forms of relief and may make them eligible for more streamlined (expedited) removal processes. The "standard" removal process is a civil judicial proceeding in which an immigration judge from DOJ's Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) determines whether an alien is removable. Immigration judges may grant certain forms of relief during the removal process (e.g., asylum, cancellation of removal), and the judge's removal decisions are subject to administrative and judicial review. The INA also describes different types of streamlined removal procedures, which generally include more-limited opportunities for relief and grounds for review. In addition, two alternative forms of removal exempt aliens from certain penalties associated with formal removal: voluntary departure (return) and withdrawal of petition for admission. These are often called "returns." Following an order of removal, an alien is inadmissible for a minimum of five years after the date of the removal, and therefore is generally ineligible to return to the United States during this time period. The period of inadmissibility is determined by the reason for and type of removal. For example, a foreign national ordered removed based on removal proceedings initiated upon the foreign national's arrival is inadmissible for five years, while a foreign national ordered removed after being apprehended within the United States is inadmissible for 10 years. The length of inadmissibility increases to 20 years for an alien's second or subsequent removal order, and is indefinite for a foreign national convicted of an aggravated felony. Absent additional factors, unlawful presence in the United States is a civil violation, not a criminal offense, and removal and its associated administrative processes are civil proceedings. As such, aliens in removal proceedings generally have no right to counsel (though they may be represented by counsel at their own expense). In addition, because removal is not considered punishment by the courts, Congress may impose immigration consequences retroactively. There were a record number of removals between FY2009 and FY2013, including 438,421 removals in FY2013. Approximately 71% of the foreign nationals removed were from Mexico. However, during the same time period the number of returns (most of which occur at the Southwest border) decreased to a low of 178,371 in FY2013-the fewest returns since 1968. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Services, 2015. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: CRS Report No. R43892: Accessed February 16, 2015 at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43892.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43892.pdf Shelf Number: 134629 Keywords: DeportationIllegal Immigrants (U.S.)ImmigrationUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Migrant Rights Centre Ireland Title: Life in the Shadows: An Exploration of Irregular Migration in Ireland Summary: Irregular migration is a complex and diverse phenomenon. There are no accurate estimates of the number of people involved in irregular migration. Despite increasingly far-reaching measures to combat it, irregular migration will continue to be an inevitable by-product of migration policies and practices. Deregulation and liberalisation of the global economy has generated a heightened demand for mobile labour. All too often irregular migrants are identified as a cheap, dispensable, unlimited source of labour. Irregular migration poses very real social, economic and political challenges for states, as well as exposing migrants themselves to insecurity and exploitation. While acknowledging the right of states to manage migration, the human rights of all members of society, including irregular migrants, must be respected. Policies, practices and public statements that seek to criminalise and demonise irregular migrants must be avoided. This requires political leadership and sensitive handling by all the key societal institutions, in particular political parties, trade unions, media and education bodies. We need to be sensitive to the gender dimension, and the fact that the impact and barriers may be different for women and men who are undocumented migrants. We should also be careful about the language we use. Human beings should not be classified as 'illegal aliens' which is a regrettable tendency currently in the United States. Irregular migrants enjoy the protection of fundamental human rights as enshrined in a range of international conventions and covenants. These rights include non-discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, sex, language, religion or social origin; the right to life; the prohibition of torture, slavery and servitude; the right to recognition before the law, and freedom of thought, conscience and religion. These rights must be realised in practice, and respected in the operation of societal institutions. Too often rights such as health care and access to justice are denied, thus undermining the principles of human rights and equality on which modern democracies are founded. This report is the first of its kind in Ireland and makes for thought-provoking and unsettling reading. The report highlights the reality that most irregular migrants become undocumented through no fault of their own. This is consistent with international research, and raises questions regarding the effectiveness of traditional policy responses such as tighter border controls and employer sanctions. Migrants living and working in an irregular status are clearly one of the most vulnerable and marginalised groups in Irish society today. Ireland prides itself on its track record in promoting human rights across the globe. We are now challenged to respond to the situation of undocumented and irregular migrants in Ireland in a way that is consistent with our human rights commitments. Details: Dublin: Migrant Rights Centre Ireland, 2007. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 16, 2015 at:http://mrci.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Life-in-the-Shadows_an-Exploration-of-Irregular-Migration-in-Ireland.pdf Year: 2007 Country: Ireland URL: http://mrci.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Life-in-the-Shadows_an-Exploration-of-Irregular-Migration-in-Ireland.pdf Shelf Number: 134926 Keywords: Immigration (Ireland)Irregular Migration Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Vaughan, Jessica M. Title: Catch and Release: Interior immigration enforcement in 2013 Summary: A review of internal ICE metrics for 2013 reveals that hundreds of thousands of deportable aliens who were identified in the interior of the country were released instead of removed under the administration's sweeping "prosecutorial discretion" guidelines. In 2013, ICE reported 722,000 encounters with potentially deportable aliens, most of whom came to their attention after incarceration for a local arrest. Yet ICE officials followed through with immigration charges for only 195,000 of these aliens, only about one-fourth. According to ICE personnel, the vast majority of these releases occurred because of current policies that shield most illegal aliens from enforcement, not because the aliens turned out to have legal status or were qualified to stay in the United States. Many of the aliens ignored by ICE were convicted criminals. In 2013, ICE agents released 68,000 aliens with criminal convictions, or 35 percent of all criminal aliens they reported encountering. The criminal alien releases typically occur without formal notice to local law enforcement agencies and victims. These findings raise further alarm over the Obama administration's pending review of deportation practices, which reportedly may further expand the administration's abuse of "prosecutorial discretion". Interior enforcement activity has already declined 40 percent since the imposition of "prosecutorial discretion" policies in 2011.1 Rather than accelerating this decline, there is an urgent need to review and reverse the public safety and fiscal harm cause by the president's policies. Key Findings - In 2013, ICE charged only 195,000, or 25 percent, out of 722,000 potentially deportable aliens they encountered. Most of these aliens came to ICE's attention after incarceration for a local arrest. - ICE released 68,000 criminal aliens in 2013, or 35 percent of the criminal aliens encountered by officers. The vast majority of these releases occurred because of the Obama administration's prosecutorial discretion policies, not because the aliens were not deportable. - ICE targeted 28 percent fewer aliens for deportation from the interior in 2013 than in 2012, despite sustained high numbers of encounters in the Criminal Alien and Secure Communities programs. - Every ICE field office but one reported a decline in interior enforcement activity, with the largest decline in the Atlanta field office, which covers Georgia and the Carolinas. - ICE reports that there are more than 870,000 aliens on its docket who have been ordered removed, but who remain in defiance of the law. - Under current policies, an alien's family relationships, political considerations, attention from advocacy groups, and other factors not related to public safety can trump even serious criminal convictions and result in the termination of a deportation case. - Less than 2 percent of ICE's caseload was in detention at the end of fiscal year 2013. - About three-fourths of the aliens ICE detained in 2013 had criminal and/or immigration convictions so serious that the detention was required by statute. This suggests the need for more detention capacity, so ICE can avoid releasing so many deportable criminal aliens. Unless otherwise noted, the data for this report are from the 2013 fiscal year-end edition of ICE's "Weekly Departures and Detention Report" (WRD), which is prepared by the Information Resource Management Unit of ICE's Office of Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO).2 This report compiles a variety of ICE caseload statistics, including encounters, arrests, detention, and removal of aliens. The tables in this report use data taken directly from the WRD. Details: Washington, DC: Center for Immigration Studies, 2014. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 29, 2015 at: http://cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/vaughan-ice-3-14_0.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/vaughan-ice-3-14_0.pdf Shelf Number: 135405 Keywords: DeportationIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DetentionImmigrants and CrimeImmigration (U.S.)Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Wasem, Ruth Ellen Title: Unaccompanied Alien Children: Demographics in Brief Summary: The number of children coming to the United States who are not accompanied by parents or legal guardians and who lack proper immigration documents has raised complex and competing sets of humanitarian concerns and immigration control issues. This report focuses on the demographics of unaccompanied alien children while they are in removal proceedings. Overwhelmingly, the children are coming from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. The median age of unaccompanied children has decreased from 17 years in FY2011 to 16 years during the first seven months of FY2014. A greater share of males than females are represented among this population. However, females have steadily increased in total numbers and as a percentage of the flow since FY2011. The median age of females has dropped from 17 years in FY2011-the year that was the median age across all groups of children-to 15 years in the first seven months of FY2014. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2014. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: R43734: Accessed April 29, 2015 at: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43734.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43734.pdf Shelf Number: 135420 Keywords: Child Protection Immigration Policy Unaccompanied Alien Children Unaccompanied Children (U.S.)Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Title: Unlocking Human Dignity: A Plan to Transform the U.S. Immigrant Detention Systems Summary: The US immigrant detention system grew more than fivefold between 1994 and 2013. During these years, the average daily detained population rose from 6,785 to 34,260 (Figure 1). The number of persons detained annually increased from roughly 85,000 persons in 1995 to 440,557 in 2013 (Kerwin 1996, 1; Simansky 2014, 6). Since the beginning of the Obama administration's detention reform initiative in 2009, annual detention numbers have reached record levels (Figure 2). More persons pass through the U.S. immigrant detention system each year than through federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) facilities (Meissner et al. 2013, 131). This growth has occurred in what may be the most troubled institution in the vast U.S. immigration enforcement system. The numbers only hint at the toll that this system exacts in despair, fractured families, human rights violations, abandoned legal claims, and diminished national prestige. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) lacks the authority to imprison criminals and does not hold anybody awaiting trial or serving a criminal sentence. Congress and DHS use the anodyne language of "processing" and "detention" to describe this system. Yet each year DHS's Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) holds hundreds of thousands of non-citizens and the occasional U.S. citizen (Carcamo 2014), many for extended periods, in prisons, jails, and other secure facilities where their lives are governed by standards designed for criminal defendants. Detention brands immigrants as criminals in the public's eye and contributes to the sense that they deserve to be treated as such. In many respects, immigrant detainees are treated less favorably than criminal defendants. U.S. mandatory detention laws cover broad categories of non-citizens, including lawful permanent residents (LPRs), asylum-seekers, petty offenders, and persons with U.S. families and other strong and longstanding ties to the United States. Sixty percent of the unauthorized have resided in the United States for 10 years or more and 17 percent for at least 20 years (Warren and Kerwin 2015, 86-87, 99). Moreover, DHS has interpreted the laws to preclude the release of mandatory detainees, even release coupled with the most intensive restrictions and monitoring. By way of contrast, most criminal defendants receive custody hearings by judicial officers shortly after their apprehension and they can be released subject to conditions that will reasonably ensure their court appearance and protect the public. Detention is treated as a pillar of the U.S. immigration enforcement system akin to border control or removal, but in fact it is a means to an end that would be far better served by a more humane, less costly system. Its purpose is to ensure that non-citizens in removal proceedings appear for their hearings and, if they are removable and lack legal relief, that their removal can be effected. Detention is also justified as a tool to protect others, although this consideration is more relevant to the criminal justice system. In fact, there are tested, effective, and humane ways to accomplish these goals short of detention. Supervised or conditional release programs have long been a mainstay of the criminal justice system, but have only recently begun to gain traction in the immigration context. Moreover, detention makes it far less likely that indigent and low-income immigrants will be able to secure legal counsel and, thus, to present their claims for relief and protection. Details: Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2015. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 4, 2015 at: http://www.usccb.org/about/migration-and-refugee-services/upload/unlocking-human-dignity.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.usccb.org/about/migration-and-refugee-services/upload/unlocking-human-dignity.pdf Shelf Number: 135887 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DetentionImmigrationImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Rosenblum, Marc R. Title: Understanding the Potential Impact of Executive Action on Immigration Enforcement Summary: While much of the attention to the Obama administration's announcement of executive actions on immigration in November 2014 has focused on key deferred action programs, two changes that have not faced legal challenge are in the process of being implemented and may substantially affect the U.S. immigration enforcement system. These changes include the adoption by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of new policy guidance on which categories of unauthorized immigrants and other potentially removable noncitizens are priorities for enforcement, and the replacement of the controversial Secure Communities information-sharing program with a new, more tailored Priority Enforcement Program (PEP). The new policy guidance, which builds on previous memoranda published by the Obama administration in 2010 and 2011, further targets enforcement to noncitizens who have been convicted of serious crimes, are threats to public safety, are recent illegal entrants, or have violated recent deportation orders. MPI estimates that about 13 percent of unauthorized immigrants in the United States would be considered enforcement priorities under these policies, compared to 27 percent under the 2010-11 enforcement guidelines. The net effect of this new guidance will likely be a reduction in deportations from within the interior of the United States as DHS detention and deportation resources are increasingly allocated to more explicitly defined priorities. By comparing the new enforcement priorities to earlier DHS removal data, this report estimates that the 2014 policy guidance, if strictly adhered to, is likely to reduce deportations from within the United States by about 25,000 cases annually - bringing interior removals below the 100,000 mark. Removals at the U.S.-Mexico border remain a top priority under the 2014 guidelines, so falling interior removals may be offset to some extent by increases at the border. Taking the enforcement focus off settled unauthorized immigrants who do not meet the November 2014 enforcement priorities would effectively offer a degree of protection to the vast majority - 87 percent - of unauthorized immigrants now residing in the United States, thus affecting a substantially larger share of this population than the announced deferred action programs (9.6 million compared to as many as 5.2 million unauthorized immigrants). This report analyzes how many unauthorized immigrants fall within each of the new priority categories and how implementation of these priorities could affect the number of deportations from the United States, as well as what the termination of Secure Communities and launch of PEP could mean for federal cooperation with state and local authorities on immigration. Details: Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2015. 31p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 29, 2015 at: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/understanding-potential-impact-executive-action-immigration-enforcement Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/understanding-potential-impact-executive-action-immigration-enforcement Shelf Number: 136235 Keywords: Criminal Aliens Deportation Illegal Immigrants Immigration Immigration EnforcementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Martinez, Daniel E. Title: Bordering on Criminal: The Routine Abuse of Migrants in the Removal System. Part I: Migrant Mistreatment While in U.S. Custody Summary: This is the first in a series of three reports we will be releasing that highlight findings from the second wave of the Migrant Border Crossing Study (MBCS). Wave II of the MBCS, currently housed in the Center for Latin American Studies at the University of Arizona and the Department of Sociology at George Washington University, is a binational, multiinstitution study of 1,110 randomly selected, recently repatriated migrants1 surveyed in six Mexican cities between 2009 and 2012. This report focuses on the mistreatment of unauthorized migrants while in U.S. custody. Overall, we find that the physical and verbal mistreatment of migrants is not a random, sporadic occurrence but, rather, a systematic practice. One indication of this is that 11% of deportees report some form of physical abuse and 23% report verbal mistreatment while in U.S. custody - a finding that is supported by other academic studies and reports from nongovernmental organizations. Another highly disturbing finding is that migrants often note they are the targets for nationalistic and racist remarks - something that in no way is integral to U.S. officials' ability to function in an effective capacity on a day-to-day basis. We find that, when they occur, physical and verbal abuses are usually perpetrated during the apprehension process. When taken in the context of prior studies, it appears that the abuse of migrants while in U.S. custody is a systemic problem and points to an organizational subculture stemming from a lack of transparency and accountability in U.S. Customs and Border Protection. These patterns of abuse have brought scrutiny to the Border Patrol's use-of-force policies and created tension in border communities. Future research should examine the longer-term social and psychological consequences of these types of abuse for migrants and their loved ones. Details: Washington, DC: Immigration Policy Center, American Immigration Council, 2013. 15p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 19, 2015 at: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/ipc/Border%20-%20Abuses%20FINAL.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/ipc/Border%20-%20Abuses%20FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 132197 Keywords: Immigrant Detention Immigrants Immigration Immigration Enforcement Operation StreamlineUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Kandel, William A. Title: Unaccompanied Alien Children: An Overview Summary: In FY2014, the number of unaccompanied alien children (UAC, unaccompanied children) that were apprehended at the Southwest border while attempting to enter the United States without authorization increased sharply, straining the system put in place over the past decade to handle such cases. Prior to FY2014, UAC apprehensions were steadily increasing. For example, in FY2011, the Border Patrol apprehended 16,067 unaccompanied children at the Southwest border whereas in FY2014 more than 68,500 unaccompanied children were apprehended. In the first 8 months of FY2015, UAC apprehensions numbered 22,869, down 49% from the same period in FY2014. UAC are defined in statute as children who lack lawful immigration status in the United States, who are under the age of 18, and who either are without a parent or legal guardian in the United States or without a parent or legal guardian in the United States who is available to provide care and physical custody. Two statutes and a legal settlement directly affect U.S. policy for the treatment and administrative processing of UAC: the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-457); the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296); and the Flores Settlement Agreement of 1997. Several agencies in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Health and Human Services' (HHS's) Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) share responsibility for the processing, treatment, and placement of UAC. DHS Customs and Border Protection (CBP) apprehends and detains unaccompanied children arrested at the border while Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) handles custody transfer and repatriation responsibilities. ICE also apprehends UAC in the interior of the country and represents the government in removal proceedings. HHS coordinates and implements the care and placement of unaccompanied children in appropriate custody. Foreign nationals from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico accounted for almost all UAC cases in recent years, especially in FY2014. In FY2009, when the number of UAC apprehended at the Southwest border was 19,688, foreign nationals from Mexico accounted for 82% of all UAC apprehensions at the Southwest border and the three Central American countries accounted for 17% of these apprehensions. In FY2014, the proportions had almost reversed, with Mexican UAC comprising only 23% of UAC apprehensions and unaccompanied children from the three Central American countries comprising 77%. To address the crisis, the Administration developed a working group to coordinate the efforts of federal agencies involved. It also opened additional shelters and holding facilities to accommodate the large number of UAC apprehended at the border. In June 2014, the Administration announced plans to provide funding to the affected Central American countries for a variety of programs and security-related initiatives; and in July, the Administration requested $3.7 billion in supplemental appropriations for FY2014 to address the crisis. Congress debated the supplemental appropriations but did not pass such legislation. For FY2015, Congress appropriated nearly $1.6 billion for the Refugee and Entrant Assistance Programs in ORR, the majority of which is directed toward the UAC program (P.L. 113-235). For DHS agencies, Congress appropriated $3.4 billion for detection, enforcement, and removal operations, including for the transport of unaccompanied children for CBP. The Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, FY2015 (P.L. 114-4) also permits the Secretary of Homeland Security to reprogram funds within CBP and ICE and transfer such funds into the two agencies' "Salaries and Expenses" accounts for the care and transportation of unaccompanied children. P.L. 114-4 also allows for several DHS grants awarded to states along the Southwest border to be used by recipients for costs or reimbursement of costs related to providing humanitarian relief to unaccompanied children. Congressional activity on two pieces of legislation in the 114th Congress (H.R. 1153 and H.R. 1149) would make changes to current UAC policy, including amending the definition of UAC, altering current law on the treatment of unaccompanied children from contiguous countries, and amending several asylum provisions that would alter how unaccompanied children who assert an asylum claim are processed, among other things. Several other bills have been introduced without seeing legislative activity (H.R. 191/S. 129, H.R. 1700, H.R. 2491, and S. 44). Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2015. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: CRS Report R43599: Accessed August 26, 2015 at: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43599.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R43599.pdf Shelf Number: 136587 Keywords: Child ImmigrantsChild Protection Immigrant ChildrenUnaccompanied Alien ChildrenUndocumented Children Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Capps, Randy Title: Implications of Immigration Enforcement Activities for the Well-Being of Children in Immigrant Families: A Review of the Literature Summary: Rising immigration enforcement in the U.S. interior over the past decade increased the chances that the estimated 5.3 million children living with unauthorized immigrant parents, the vast majority of them born in the United States, could experience the deportation of a parent. This MPI-Urban Institute report reviews the evidence on the impacts of parental deportation on children, and on their needs for health and social services. The literature mostly dates from a period of peak enforcement: 2009 through 2013, when there were nearly 4 million deportations from the United States. While data on parental removals during this period are limited, perhaps half a million were of parents of U.S.-citizen children. The economic and social instability that generally accompanies unauthorized status is further aggravated for children with a parent's deportation, with effects including psychological trauma, material hardship, residential instability, family dissolution, increased use of public benefits, and, among boys, aggression. At the extreme end, some families became permanently separated as parents lose custody of or contact with their children. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute and Migration Policy Institute, 2015. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 24, 2015 at: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/implications-immigration-enforcement-activities-well-being-children-immigrant-families Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/implications-immigration-enforcement-activities-well-being-children-immigrant-families Shelf Number: 136856 Keywords: Illegal Immigrants Immigrant ChildrenImmigration (U.S.) Immigration EnforcementImmigration Policy Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Lyubarsky, Andrew Title: 23 Hours in the Box: Solitary Confinement in New Jersey Immigration Detention Summary: While solitary confinement is a practice widely used in both civil detention and criminal incarceration, current practices by state and federal facilities have received significant criticism for over reliance on solitary confinement and excessive disciplinary sanctions. The State of New Jersey has a long history of using solitary confinement in its state prisons as a system of control and intimidation. In 1975, after the Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War and the prisoners' rights movement, Trenton State Prison (now New Jersey State Prison) established an administrative isolation unit for politically dissident prisoners. Management Control Units (MCUs), which were characterized by "no-touch isolation" and severe restrictions on visits and telephone contact with family members, recreation, as well as the denial of work, education, law library access, and collective religious practice - imposed nearly complete sensory deprivation on those subjected to it. Individuals who had not broken institutional rules were isolated because they belonged to radical political groups, particularly Afro-American nationalist organizations. Some people were subject to this treatment for years; Ojore Lutalo, a member of one such group, was held in isolation for 16 years. The American Friends Service Committee and other New Jersey civil society groups have actively monitored the use of isolated confinement in the state for decades, and fought to secure dignity for many of those subjected to prolonged isolated confinement. The present report continues this tradition of advocacy by focusing exclusively on immigration detainees in civil detention. Though the deprivations immigrant detainees subject to solitary confinement in New Jersey county institutions may not be as prolonged, they are a particularly vulnerable population which suffers lasting psychological damage from isolation. Though such conditions are extremely troubling in the case of confined individuals generally, these problems are of special concern in the context of immigrant detainees. Although immigration detention has always been characterized as non-punitive, and the rhetoric from the Obama Administration has emphasized a reform of the civil immigration detention system, this report finds that immigrant detainees are subject to an unnecessarily harsh system that applies the drastic punishment of solitary confinement too often and for too long. Because immigrants are held in penal facilities they are subjected to the same heavy-handed tactics as criminal inmates, and minor incidents which could easily be handled with non-punitive conflict resolution techniques or, if needed, less restrictive sanctions, immediately trigger solitary confinement. Detainees are confined, often for prolonged periods of time, even when no threat exists to the safety or the functioning of the facilities. Moreover, the current system raises serious due process concerns regarding the policies and practices of disciplinary systems and non-compliance with state regulations in several important respects. Our focus on disciplinary systems and sanctions proceeds from an increased clinical consensus about the severe effects of prolonged solitary confinement on an individual's psychological and physical well-being. Studies have cataloged a series of unique psychiatric symptoms commonly associated with solitary confinement. Taken together, these symptoms rise to the level of a formal psychiatric diagnosis of trauma referred to as "prison psychosis." These harmful effects can be compounded by pre-existing mental health problems that the detainee may have experienced prior to his or her solitary confinement. Since many individuals in immigration detention are likely to have been the victims of life traumas, such as human trafficking, domestic violence, torture, and persecution, solitary confinement poses a unique threat to this population. Details: New York: New Jersey Advocates for Immigrant Detainees, 2015. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 22, 2015 at: http://afsc.org/sites/afsc.civicactions.net/files/documents/23%20Hours%20in%20the%20Box.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://afsc.org/sites/afsc.civicactions.net/files/documents/23%20Hours%20in%20the%20Box.pdf Shelf Number: 137052 Keywords: Immigrant DetentionImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementIsolationSolitary ConfinementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Gros, Hanna Title: Summary: Every year thousands of non-citizens ("migrants") are detained in Canada; in 2013, for example, over 7300 migrants were detained. Nearly one third of all detention occurs in a facility intended for a criminal population. Migrants detained in provincial jails are not currently serving a criminal sentence, but are effectively serving hard time. Our research indicates that detention is sometimes prolonged, and can drag on for years. Imprisonment exacerbates existing mental health issues and often creates new ones, including suicidal ideation. Nearly one third of all detention occurs in a facility intended for a criminal population, while the remaining occurs in dedicated immigration holding centres (IHCs) in Toronto (195 beds), Montreal (150 beds), and Vancouver (24 beds, for short stays of less than 72 hours). Nearly 60% of all detention occurs in Ontario. A Canadian Red Cross Society report notes that, Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) held 2247 migrants in detention in Ontario provincial jails in 2012. Unfortunately, more up-to-date statistics are not publicly available. Immigration detention is costly. In 2011-2012, the last year for which there is publicly - available information, CBSA spent nearly $50,000,000 on detention - related activities. In 2013, CBSA paid the provinces over $26,000,000 to detain migrants in provincial jails - over $20,000,000 of that was paid to the province of Ontario. CBSA states that detention in a provincial jail costs $259 per day, per detainee. This report finds that Canada's detention of migrants with mental health issues in provincial jails is a violation of binding international human rights law and constitutes arbitrary detention; cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment; discrimination on the basis of disability; violates the right to health; and violates the right to an effective remedy. We find that migrants with mental health issues are routinely detained despite their vulnerable status. Some detainees have no past criminal record, but are detained on the basis that they are a flight risk, or because their identity cannot be confirmed. Due to the overrepresentation of people with mental health issues in Canada's criminal justice system, some migrants with mental health issues are detained on the basis of past criminality - this is after serving their criminal sentence, however minor the underlying offence. Some spend more time in jail on account of their immigration status than the underlying criminal conviction. Despite Canada's strong commitment to the rights of persons with disabilities, migrants with serious mental health issues are routinely imprisoned in maximum-security provincial jails (as opposed to dedicated, medium-security IHCs). Indeed, the Canadian government publicly states that one of the factors it considers in deciding to transfer a detainee from an IHC to a provincial jail is the existence of a mental health issue. Counsel and jail staff we spoke to noted that migrants are often held in provincial jails on the basis of pre-existing mental health issues (including suicidal ideation), medical issues, or because they are deemed 'problematic' or uncooperative by CBSA. The government claims that detainees can better access health care services in jail, even though all our research indicates that mental health care in provincial jails is woefully inadequate and has been the subject of recent reports and human rights complaints. Alarmingly, we could find no established criteria in law to determine when a detainee can or should be transferred from an IHC to a provincial jail - the decision is at the whim of CBSA. Detainees' counsel are not notified of the transfer in advance and do not have the right to make submissions to challenge it. Of course, outside of Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal, all detainees are held in jails since there are no dedicated facilities to house migrants. Once a detainee finds him or herself in provincial jail, they fall into a legal black hole where neither CBSA nor the provincial jail has clear authority over their conditions of confinement. This is especially problematic since, in Ontario at least, there is no regular, independent monitoring of provincial jails that house immigration detainees. Unfortunately, while the laws and policies on their face pay lip service to the importance of exploring alternatives to detention, the numerous counsel and experts we interviewed all identified the lack of meaningful or viable alternatives to detention for those with mental health issues due to ingrained biases of government officials and quasi-judicial decision-makers who review continued detention. In practice, the detention review process, which is meant to mitigate the risk of indefinite detention, actually facilitates it. Ontario counsel we spoke to uniformly expressed frustration with the futility of the reviews, where a string of lay decision-makers preside over hearings that last a matter of minutes, lack due process, and presume continued detention absent "clear and compelling reasons" to depart from past decisions. It is an exercise in smoke and mirrors. The immigration detainees we profile spent between two months and eight years imprisoned in maximum-security provincial jails, and each had a diagnosed mental health issue and/or expressed serious anxiety or suicidal ideation. Without exception, detention in a provincial jail, even for a short period, exacerbated their mental health issues, or created new ones. This is, of course, unsurprising given the overwhelming evidence that immigration detention is devastating for those with mental health issues. Without exception, the immigration detainees we spoke to communicated incredible despair and anxiety - over their immigration status, their seemingly indefinite detention, their lack of legal rights, their conditions of confinement, and the lack of adequate mental health resources to allow them to get better. They are treated like "garbage," "animals," or something less than human. The detention of migrants with mental health issues in provincial jails violates the human rights of some of the most vulnerable people in Canadian society. It violates numerous human rights treaties to which Canada is a party, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, as well as jus cogens norms of customary international law. Details: Toronto: International Human Rights Program (IHRP) University of Toronto Faculty of Law, 2015. 129p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 27, 2015 at: http://ihrp.law.utoronto.ca/utfl_file/count/PUBLICATIONS/IHRP%20We%20Have%20No%20Rights%20Report%20web%20170615.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://ihrp.law.utoronto.ca/utfl_file/count/PUBLICATIONS/IHRP%20We%20Have%20No%20Rights%20Report%20web%20170615.pdf Shelf Number: 137152 Keywords: Human Rights AbusesIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DetentionMental Health ServicesMigrantsUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: National Immigrant Justice Center Title: Lives in Peril: How Ineffective Inspections Make ICE Complicit in Immigration Detention Abuse Summary: The report draws on information from ICE inspections documents for 105 immigration detention facilities and features focused analyses of inspections for detention centers in Arizona, Florida, Alabama, Texas, Georgia and Illinois. NIJC obtained the inspections through a federal court order resulting from three years of litigation under the Freedom of Information Act. NIJC and DWN's review of the documents reveals fundamental inconsistencies within and between inspection reports for individual detention centers which suggests that the immigration detention inspection process is a sham - designed to perpetuate a broken and abusive system. Toplines from the report include: ◾ICE has kept the detention inspections process centralized under its own authority and has hidden the system from the eyes of U.S. taxpayers. ◾ICE's inspection regime fails to provide an accurate assessment of the conditions immigrants experience in detention, holds most facilities to weak and outdated human rights standards, and often fails to acknowledge publicly reported abuses. ◾Numerous inconsistencies within and between inspection reports raise serious questions about the validity of ICE inspections and imply that the inspection process is designed to facilitate passing ratings so that local governments and private prison companies can maintain their contracts. This report makes it obvious that ICE cannot police itself. ◾A robust and legitimate inspection process would find that detention facilities around the country fail to meet basic minimum standards, and require ICE to discontinue contracts with facilities that fail to uphold basic human rights protections. Details: Chicago: NIJC, 2015. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 27, 2015 at: http://immigrantjustice.org/sites/immigrantjustice.org/files/THR-Inspections-FOIA-Report-October-2015-FINAL.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://immigrantjustice.org/sites/immigrantjustice.org/files/THR-Inspections-FOIA-Report-October-2015-FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 137154 Keywords: Immigrant DetentionImmigration EnforcementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Title: Human Rights Situation of Refugee and Migrant Families and Unaccompanied Children in the United State of America Summary: This report addresses the situation of migrant and refugee families and unaccompanied children arriving to the southern border of the United States of America. It analyzes the context of humanitarian crises that have been taking place over the past several years in the countries of the Northern Triangle in Central America - El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras - as well as in Mexico. These crises have been generating increased migration northward, principally to the United States, and to a lesser extent Mexico and Canada. This report offers recommendations geared towards assisting the United States in strengthening its efforts to protect and guarantee the rights of the diverse group of persons in these mixed migratory movements - among them, migrants, asylum-seekers and refugees, women, children, families, and other vulnerable persons and groups in the context of human mobility. 2. In recent years, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter the "Inter-American Commission," "Commission," or "IACHR"), through its various mechanisms, has documented with concern the increasing number of persons, including children, fleeing various forms of violence in countries of the Northern Triangle of Central America - El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras - and Mexico. This violence, along with other factors, such as poverty, inequality, and various forms of discrimination, has led to the current state of humanitarian crises in the region. In its report on the Human Rights of Migrants and Other Persons in the Context of Human Mobility in Mexico (2013), the Commission documented, among other issues, the serious violence, insecurity, and discrimination that migrants in an irregular situation in Mexico encounter, in addition to troubling State responses such as immigration detention and deficiencies in due process guarantees for migrants and other persons in human mobility. In its Report on Immigration in the United States: Detention and Due Process (2011), the IACHR documented with concern the United States' response to increasing mixed migratory movements. Since the mid-1990s, this response has consisted of stepped up efforts to detect, detain, and deport migrants in an irregular situation. Some of the most dramatic spikes seen yet in the number of arrivals of unaccompanied children and families to the United States occurred between October 1, 2013 and September 30, 2014 ("U.S. fiscal year 2014"), and specifically in the months of May and June 2014. According to official data, during U.S. fiscal year 2014, the U.S. Border Patrol apprehended a total of 68,541 unaccompanied children and 68,445 families, which represented a 77% increase in the number of arrivals of unaccompanied children and a 361% increase in families over fiscal year 2013. The majority of the arrivals of unaccompanied children and families were to the U.S. southwest border and particularly to the Rio Grande Valley of the state of Texas. The Commission considers that this drastic uptick in the number of arrivals signals a worsening human rights situation in the principal countries of origin. Official data shows that the top four countries of origin for both unaccompanied children and families were El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico. 4. The IACHR conducted the visit to the U.S. southern border from September 29 - October 2, 2014. The visit was planned and carried out in the context of monitoring the human rights situation of arriving families and unaccompanied children with respect to their apprehension; immigration detention, in many cases over long periods of time; immigration proceedings; as well as deportations and removals. To this end, the Commission visited the Rio Grande Valley area, including McAllen and Harlingen, as well as Karnes City and San Antonio, Texas. 5. According to the information received, families for whom there is capacity at an immigration detention center are automatically and arbitrarily being detained for the duration of the immigration proceedings initiated against them, even in cases where the mother has passed an initial asylum screening. Other information received by the Commission indicated that unaccompanied children of Mexican origin are, in some cases, being turned around before entering U.S. soil (a practice called a 'turn-back") or U.S. officers are failing to correctly identify Mexican unaccompanied children who may have protection needs. While the Commission considers that aspects relating to the overall legal regime in place for unaccompanied children from non-contiguous countries are consistent with international standards, it remains concerned over the lack of due process guarantees and access to mechanisms of international protection for these children in immigration proceedings. 6. For all the sub-groups identified herein, the Inter-American Commission is concerned over allegations of sexual, physical, and verbal abuse by U.S. border officials committed while migrant and refugee children and families are in the State's custody as well as the inadequate detention conditions at border and port of entry stations and family immigration detention centers. The Commission is also deeply concerned over expedited processing of these groups and the lack of access to legal representation in the immigration proceedings initiated against them. 7. The Charter of the Organization of American States (OAS) and the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man constitute sources of legal obligation for OAS Member States including the United States. The organs of the international and regional human rights systems have developed jurisprudence that recognizes the rights of children, families, migrants, and refugees and asylum-seekers. International standards protect the right to equality and non-discrimination, the principle of the best interests of the child, the right to personal liberty, humane treatment during detention, due process and access to justice, consular notification, protection of the family and family life, seek and receive asylum, principle of non-refoulement, and the prohibition on collective expulsions. 8. The IACHR stresses that measures taken to securitize the border will not bring these crises to an end. Rather, the underlying factors generating the crises in the principal countries of origin must be comprehensively addressed. This approach must tackle the poverty, economic and gender inequality, multi-sectorial discrimination, and high levels of violence in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico. Without national and regional efforts to address such factors, mixed migratory movements will only continue. Without the ability to migrate safely and through more open or regular channels, these persons will be forced to take even more dangerous and clandestine routes in order to bypass increasingly securitized borders. Such new routes increase the likelihood that persons in the context of human mobility will fall victim to violence and exploitation at the hands of organized crime groups. 9. Based on its close analysis of the situation of migrant and refugee unaccompanied children and families arriving to the southern border of the United States of America, in the present report the Inter-American Commission issues a series of recommendations to the State. The IACHR notes and commends the United States for its sustained efforts to receive and resettle thousands of asylum-seekers and refugees from all over the world, year after year. In light of the State's global position as a leader on protecting the rights of persons in need of international protection, it is the IACHR's hope that the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report will assist it in upholding its human rights obligations and its commitment to serve as a refuge for many thousands of persons each year. In this regard, the Commission urges the State to end its practice of automatic and arbitrary immigration detention of families; to treat Mexican unaccompanied children with the same safeguards and procedures applicable to unaccompanied children from non-contiguous countries; to investigate claims of abuses and mistreatment committed by U.S. border agents and to prosecute and punish, where necessary, the agents responsible; to ensure that the best interests of the child principle is the guiding principle in all decisions taken with respect to children, including in immigration proceedings; and to ensure migrant and refugee children and families enjoy due process guarantees and are provided with a lawyer, if needed, at no cost to them if they cannot cover the costs on their own; among other recommendations developed in this report. Details: Washington, DC: The Commission, 2015. 112p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 30, 2015 at: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Refugees-Migrants-US.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/Refugees-Migrants-US.pdf Shelf Number: 137185 Keywords: Immigrant ChildrenImmigration EnforcementMigrant ChildrenRefugeesUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Cantor, Guillermo Title: Enforcement Overdrive: A Comprehensive Assessment of ICE's Criminal Alien Program Summary: The Criminal Alien Program (CAP) is a massive enforcement program administered by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and has become the primary channel through which interior immigration enforcement takes place. Between two-thirds and three-quarters of individuals removed from the interior of the United States are removed through CAP. Each year, Congress allocates hundreds of millions of dollars to fund this program. Until now, however, little has been known about how CAP works, whom CAP deports, and whether CAP has been effective in meeting its goals. Based on government data and documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), this report examines CAP's evolution, operations, and outcomes between fiscal years 2010 and 2013. That data shows that through CAP's enormous web, ICE has encountered millions and removed hundreds of thousands of people. Yet, CAP is not narrowly tailored to focus enforcement efforts on the most serious security or safety threats - in part because CAP uses criminal arrest as a proxy for dangerousness and because the agency's own priorities have been drawn more broadly than those threats. As a result, the program removed mainly people with no criminal convictions, and people who have not been convicted of violent crimes or crimes the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) classifies as serious. CAP also has resulted in several anomalies, including that it appears biased against Mexican and Central American nationals. Moreover, the number of CAP removals differs significantly from state to state. ICE's reliance on CAP to achieve its goals will likely continue as ICE further narrows its focus on removing noncitizens with criminal convictions and continues to seek partnerships with state and local law enforcement to find them. This examination of CAP's outcomes from fiscal years 2010 to 2013 offers important insights into CAP's operations over time and its potential impact on communities moving forward. In particular, it raises questions about the ability of a broad "jail check" program to effectively remove serious public safety threats without resulting in serious unintended consequences, such as those described in this report Details: Washington, DC: American Immigration Council, 2015. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 5, 2015 at: http://immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/enforcement_overdrive_a_comprehensive_assessment_of_ices_criminal_alien_program_final.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/enforcement_overdrive_a_comprehensive_assessment_of_ices_criminal_alien_program_final.pdf Shelf Number: 137194 Keywords: DeportationImmigrant DetentionImmigrants and CrimeImmigration EnforcementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Southern Poverty Law Center Title: Families in Fear: The Atlanta Immigration Raids Summary: This report features stories from women swept up in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids that began on Jan. 2, 2016. The report by the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights found that the federal government has engaged in a needlessly aggressive - and potentially unconstitutional - act against immigrants with these home raids that targeted women and children from Central America. Details: Montgomery, AL: SPLC, 2016. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2016 at: https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/splc_families_in_fear_ice_raids_3.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/splc_families_in_fear_ice_raids_3.pdf Shelf Number: 137803 Keywords: Customs EnforcementImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Human Impact Partners Title: Family Unity, Family Health. How Family-Focused Immigration Reform Will Mean Better Health for Children and Families Summary: A sense of safety is critical to a child's health and well-being. Constant fear and anxiety harm a child's physical growth and development, emotional stability, self-confidence, social skills and ability to learn. Yet for millions of children in America, fear is a constant companion. The lives of children with undocumented immigrant parents or guardians in the United States are saturated with fear - fear that the people they love and depend on will be arrested and taken away from them at any moment without warning. Many of these children were born here and are U.S. citizens. But under current immigration policy, their families can be torn apart with an arrest and deportation with little regard for their well-being or futures. This important and timely report documents the profound and unjust impacts of deportation - and fear of deportation - on the children of undocumented immigrants. These children didn't choose their circumstance. But our misguided policies leave these children more likely to suffer from mental health issues and post-traumatic stress disorder than the children of documented immigrant parents. These children are more likely to experience aggression, anxiety and withdrawal and less likely to do well in school. If a parent is deported, they are at increased risk of going hungry, falling into poverty and dropping out of school. When one fifth of our nation's children are poor, the last thing we need are policies that will push more children into poverty and lives of despair without hope and opportunity. Details: Oakland, CA: Human Impact Partners, 2013. 75p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 10, 2016 at: http://www.familyunityfamilyhealth.org/uploads/images/FamilyUnityFamilyHealth.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.familyunityfamilyhealth.org/uploads/images/FamilyUnityFamilyHealth.pdf Shelf Number: 137830 Keywords: Children of ImmigrantsImmigrant DetentionImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Unaccompanied Children: HHS Can Take Further Actions to Monitor Their Care Summary: In fiscal year 2014, nearly 57,500 children traveling without their parents or guardians (referred to as unaccompanied children) were apprehended by federal immigration officers and transferred to the care of the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). Most of these children were from Central America. GAO found that ORR was initially unprepared to care for that many children; however, the agency increased its bed capacity to accommodate up to 10,000 children at a time. Given the unprecedented demand for capacity in 2014, ORR developed a plan to help prepare it to meet fiscal year 2015 needs. The number of children needing ORR's care declined significantly through most of fiscal year 2015, but began increasing again toward the end of the summer. Given the inherent uncertainties associated with planning for capacity needs, ORR's lack of a process for annually updating and documenting its plan inhibits its ability to balance preparations for anticipated needs while minimizing excess capacity. ORR relies on grantees to provide care for unaccompanied children, including housing and educational, medical, and therapeutic services. GAO's review of a sample of children's case files found that they often did not contain required documents, making it difficult to verify that all required services were provided. ORR revised its on-site monitoring program in 2014 to ensure better coverage of grantees. However, ORR was not able to complete all the visits it planned for fiscal years 2014 and 2015, citing lack of resources. By not monitoring its grantees consistently, ORR may not be able to identify areas where children's care is not provided in accordance with ORR policies and the agreements with grantees. ORR grantees conduct various background checks on potential sponsors prior to releasing children to them. These potential sponsors are identified and screened by the grantees as part of their responsibilities for the unaccompanied children in their care. The extent of the checks conducted depends on the relationship of the sponsor to the child. Between January 2014 and April 2015, ORR released about 50,000 children from Central America to sponsors to await their immigration hearings. In nearly 90 percent of these cases, the sponsors were a parent or other close relative already residing in the United States. Sponsors do not need to have legal U.S. residency status. There is limited information available on post-release services provided to children after they leave ORR care. In part, this is because ORR is only required to provide services to a small percentage of children, such as those who were victims of trafficking. In May 2015, ORR established a National Call Center to assist children who may be facing placement disruptions, making post-release services available to some of them. Also, in August 2015, ORR began requiring well-being follow-up calls to all children 30 days after their release. ORR is collecting information through these new initiatives, but does not currently have a process to ensure that the data are reliable, systematically collected, or compiled in summary form. Service providers GAO spoke with also noted that some of these children may have difficultly accessing services due to the lack of bilingual services in the community, lack of health insurance, or other barriers. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2016. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-16-180: Accessed February 22, 2016 at: http://gao.gov/assets/680/675001.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://gao.gov/assets/680/675001.pdf Shelf Number: 137934 Keywords: Immigrant Children Immigration Enforcement Migrant Children Refugees Unaccompanied Children Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Dustmann, Christian Title: Illegal Migration and Consumption Behavior of Immigrant Households Summary: We analyze the effect of immigrants' legal status on their consumption behavior using unique survey data that samples both documented and undocumented immigrants. To address the problem of sorting into legal status, we propose two alternative identification strategies as exogenous source of variation for current legal status: First, transitory income shocks in the home country, measured as rainfall shocks at the time of emigration. Second, amnesty quotas that grant legal residence status to undocumented immigrants. Both sources of variation create a strong first stage, and - although very different in nature - lead to similar estimates of the effects of illegal status on consumption, with undocumented immigrants consuming about 40% less than documented immigrants, conditional on background characteristics. Roughly one quarter of this decrease is explained by undocumented immigrants having lower incomes than documented immigrants. Our findings imply that legalization programs may have a potentially important effect on immigrants' consumption behavior, with consequences for both the source and host countries. Details: Munich: Center for Economic Studies (CESifo), 2016. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: CESifo Working Paper No. 5822: Accessed April 6, 2016 at: http://www.cesifo-group.de/ifoHome/publications/working-papers/CESifoWP/CESifoWPdetails?wp_num=5822&CESifoWP.search=+ Year: 2016 Country: Germany URL: http://www.cesifo-group.de/ifoHome/publications/working-papers/CESifoWP/CESifoWPdetails?wp_num=5822&CESifoWP.search=+ Shelf Number: 138570 Keywords: Illegal MigrationImmigration EnforcementMigrantsUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: National Immigration Law Center Title: Blazing a Trail: The Fight for Right to Counsel in Detention and Beyond Summary: The federal government has long interpreted the immigration laws to mean that immigrants have a right to be represented by counsel in their deportation proceedings, but not at government expense. Making the right to counsel a reality is an imperative for all immigrants in removal proceedings, but the situation is even more critical for detained immigrants. As this report shows, the very circumstances of detention make that right a legal fiction for almost all detained immigrants. Mounting empirical data show that having a lawyer to help navigate the complex maze of the immigration detention and court systems makes a profound difference in a person's ability to gain release from detention, challenge the government's grounds for seeking their deportation, and present and win a defense that allows the person to remain in the U.S. Innovative projects in New York and New Jersey have begun to provide what we are calling in this report "universal representation," i.e., representation to any detained immigrant within the jurisdiction of a particular immigration court who does not have a private lawyer and who meets certain income requirements. Inspired by these examples, other localities across the country are examining how they can develop similar programs. Details: Los Angeles: National Immigration Law Center, 2016. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 23, 2016 at: https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Right-to-Counsel-Blazing-a-Trail-2016-03.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Right-to-Counsel-Blazing-a-Trail-2016-03.pdf Shelf Number: 138782 Keywords: Immigrant DetentionImmigrationImmigration EnforcementLegal AidRight to CounselUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Missing Children Europe Title: Best practices and key challenges on interagency cooperation to safeguard unaccompanied children from going missing Summary: On 31 January 2016, Europol reported that 10,000 unaccompanied children are unaccounted for after arriving in Europe, with many feared to be exploited and abused for sexual or labour purposes. While systematic and comprehensive data on the disappearance of unaccompanied children in Europe is unavailable to date, it is clear that the rate of children that go missing from care facilities is staggering - and continues to increase in the recent refugee crisis. In 2015, the Swedish coastal town of Trellerborg reported that 1000 out of the 1900 who had arrived in the town had gone missing within the span of a month. The Italian Ministry of Welfare declared that 62% of the children that had arrived between January and May 2015 were unaccounted for. In January 2016, the Federal Criminal Police (BKA) reported that 4749 unaccompanied child and adolescent refugees are considered to be missing, of which 431 were younger than 13-years-old. Each and every one of these children is a child with hopes, dreams and fears, who are entitled to the same human rights as the rest of us. The vast majority have arrived in Europe following long and difficult journeys over land and sea, having left their home because of conflict, war or poverty. Some have been separated from their families during the journey. Some others have been sent to Europe by their parents, who stay behind hoping their child will find a better future in Europe. Once in Europe, some children go missing from care facilities with a specific migration plan in mind, often linked to a wish to be reunited with family members in other Member States. Many run away because of the fear of being sent back to the situation they tried to escape from, or to avoid an unwanted Dublin transfer. Others are groomed by traffickers and end up being exploited in prostitution, forced labour or begging. Irrespective of the reason why they go missing, many of them slip through the net of child protection systems in place that increases the risk of children becoming victims of violations of their basic human rights. Protecting these children is a shared responsibility of all EU Member States, at the level of law enforcement authorities, guardians, reception centres, hotline professionals and more. Too often failing cooperation and coordination, nationally and transnationally, between these stakeholders becomes an obstacle to achieving what we ultimately all aim to do: bringing these children to safety and protecting them from harm. The SUMMIT project coordinated by Missing Children Europe in partnership with the University of Portsmouth (UK), NIDOS (NL), Defence for children-ECPAT (NL), TUSLA (IR), KMOP (EL) and Child Circle (BE), and with the support of the European Commission, aims to contribute to improving effective interagency cooperation in preventing and responding to the disappearance of unaccompanied children. The current report provides for a first deliverable in the project: the analysis and findings of interviews conducted with grassroots practitioners in 7 EU Member States. These findings highlight a number of challenges encountered by professionals working for the protection of unaccompanied children, but also several good practices On 31 January 2016, Europol reported that 10,000 unaccompanied children are unaccounted for after arriving in Europe, with many feared to be exploited and abused for sexual or labour purposes. While systematic and comprehensive data on the disappearance of unaccompanied children in Europe is unavailable to date, it is clear that the rate of children that go missing from care facilities is staggering - and continues to increase in the recent refugee crisis. In 2015, the Swedish coastal town of Trellerborg reported that 1000 out of the 1900 who had arrived in the town had gone missing within the span of a month. The Italian Ministry of Welfare declared that 62% of the children that had arrived between January and May 2015 were unaccounted for. In January 2016, the Federal Criminal Police (BKA) reported that 4749 unaccompanied child and adolescent refugees are considered to be missing, of which 431 were younger than 13-years-old. Each and every one of these children is a child with hopes, dreams and fears, who are entitled to the same human rights as the rest of us. The vast majority have arrived in Europe following long and difficult journeys over land and sea, having left their home because of conflict, war or poverty. Some have been separated from their families during the journey. Some others have been sent to Europe by their parents, who stay behind hoping their child will find a better future in Europe. Once in Europe, some children go missing from care facilities with a specific migration plan in mind, often linked to a wish to be reunited with family members in other Member States. Many run away because of the fear of being sent back to the situation they tried to escape from, or to avoid an unwanted Dublin transfer. Others are groomed by traffickers and end up being exploited in prostitution, forced labour or begging. Irrespective of the reason why they go missing, many of them slip through the net of child protection systems in place that increases the risk of children becoming victims of violations of their basic human rights. Protecting these children is a shared responsibility of all EU Member States, at the level of law enforcement authorities, guardians, reception centres, hotline professionals and more. Too often failing cooperation and coordination, nationally and transnationally, between these stakeholders becomes an obstacle to achieving what we ultimately all aim to do: bringing these children to safety and protecting them from harm. The SUMMIT project coordinated by Missing Children Europe in partnership with the University of Portsmouth (UK), NIDOS (NL), Defence for children-ECPAT (NL), TUSLA (IR), KMOP (EL) and Child Circle (BE), and with the support of the European Commission, aims to contribute to improving effective interagency cooperation in preventing and responding to the disappearance of unaccompanied children. The current report provides for a first deliverable in the project: the analysis and findings of interviews conducted with grassroots practitioners in 7 EU Member States. These findings highlight a number of challenges encountered by professionals working for the protection of unaccompanied children, but also several good practices Details: Brussels: Missing Children Europe, 2016. 110p. Source: Internet Resource: Summit Report: Accessed April 23, 2016 at: http://missingchildreneurope.eu/Portals/0/Docs/Best%20practices%20and%20key%20challenges%20for%20interagency%20cooperation%20to%20safeguard%20unaccompanied%20migrant%20children%20from%20going%20missing.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Europe URL: http://missingchildreneurope.eu/Portals/0/Docs/Best%20practices%20and%20key%20challenges%20for%20interagency%20cooperation%20to%20safeguard%20unaccompanied%20migrant%20children%20from%20going%20missing.pdf Shelf Number: 138792 Keywords: ImmigrationMissing ChildrenUnaccompanied ChildrenUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Lampard, Kate Title: Independent investigation into concerns about Yarl's Wood Immigration removal centre Summary: An independent report published today into the culture and practices at Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre ('Yarl's Wood') has found there is not an endemic culture of abuse nor a hidden problem of inappropriate behaviour by staff at the centre. The report, commissioned by Serco following a series of allegations, did however find serious concerns with staffing arrangements including capacity, training, and an inadequate proportion of female officers to care for women at the centre, and has made 35 recommendations for improvement. The investigation, by Kate Lampard CBE and Ed Marsden from Verita, highlighted both the challenges of running Yarl's Wood and the concerns and experiences of the residents living there whilst their immigration applications are processed. Further specific issues identified by the investigating team as needing improvement, include: the physical environment and access to outside space; the availability of meaningful activities and education programmes for residents; weaknesses in safeguarding arrangements and policies; inconsistent policies and underdeveloped practice in relation to raising concerns and whistle blowing; the choice and quality of the food available; and training, development and appraisal of staff. In addition the report makes recommendations aimed at ensuring greater transparency and openness about Yarl's Wood, noting how there is a disparity between perceptions and the reality of how the centre is managed and run. Details: London: Verita Consultants, 2016. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 11, 2016 at: http://www.yarlswood.co.uk/news/view/an-independent-investigation-into-concerns-about-yarls-wood-immigration-rem Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.yarlswood.co.uk/news/view/an-independent-investigation-into-concerns-about-yarls-wood-immigration-rem Shelf Number: 139007 Keywords: Asylum SeekersImmigrant DetentionImmigrationImmigration EnforcementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Neville, Darren Title: On the frontline: the hotspot approach to managing migration Summary: This study, commissioned by the European Parliament's Policy Department for Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs at the request of the LIBE Committee, places the new "hotspot approach" to managing migration within its policy framework. It examines the way in which EU agencies provide support to frontline Member States, with particular focus on Greece, and assesses the chief challenges identified to date in both the policy design and operational implementation of hotspots. Details: Brussels: Policy Department of Citizen's Rights and Constitutional Affairs, European Parliament, 2016. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 16, 2016 at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/556942/IPOL_STU(2016)556942_EN.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Europe URL: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2016/556942/IPOL_STU(2016)556942_EN.pdf Shelf Number: 139049 Keywords: ImmigrantsImmigrationImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Cantor, Guillermo Title: Detained, Deceived, and Deported: Experiences of Recently Deported Central American Families Summary: Over the last few years, the escalation of violence in Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala (collectively known as the Northern Triangle of Central America) has reached dramatic levels. Thousands of women and their children have fled and arrived in the United States with the hope of finding protection. But for many of them, their attempts to escape merely resulted in detention, deportation, and extremely difficult reintegration in Central America. In fact, for some, the conditions they face upon being repatriated are worse than those they tried to escape in the first place. Between February and May, 2016, the American Immigration Council interviewed eight individuals who were deported (or whose partners were deported) from the United States after being detained in family detention facilities, during which time they came into contact with the CARA Pro Bono Project. These women (or in two of the cases, their partners) shared their experiences - both describing what has happened to them and their children since returning to their country and recounting the detention and deportation process from the United States. First-hand accounts from Central American women and their family members interviewed for this project reveal the dangerous and bleak circumstances of life these women and their children faced upon return to their home countries, as well as serious problems in the deportation process. The testimonies describe how women are living in hiding, fear for their own and their children's lives, have minimal protection options, and suffer the consequences of state weakness and inability to ensure their safety in the Northern Triangle. The stories presented in this report are those of a fraction of the women and children who navigate a formidable emigration-detention-deportation process in their pursuit of safety. The process and systems through which they passed only contribute to the trauma, violence, and desolation that many Central American families already endured in their home country. Details: Washington, DC: American Immigration Council, 2016. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 18, 2016 at: http://immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/detained_deceived_deported_experiences_of_recently_deported_central_american_families.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/detained_deceived_deported_experiences_of_recently_deported_central_american_families.pdf Shelf Number: 139086 Keywords: Immigrant DeportationImmigrant DetentionImmigrationUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Immigration Detention: Additional Actions Needed to Strengthen DHS Management of Short-Term Holding Facilities Summary: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for providing safe, secure, and humane confinement for detained aliens who may be subject to removal or have been ordered removed from the United States. For example, during fiscal years 2014 and 2015, Border Patrol apprehended 823,768 aliens and held them temporarily in holding facilities. GAO was asked to examine DHS's management and oversight of holding facilities. This report examines the extent to which DHS has (1) standards in place for the short-term custody of aliens and monitors compliance with established standards and (2) processes in place for obtaining and addressing complaints from aliens in holding facilities. GAO reviewed CBP and ICE data on time in custody and complaints. GAO also interviewed agency officials and visited 32 holding facilities selected based on geographical location and facility type, among other factors. The visit results are not generalizable, but provided insight to the oversight of holding facilities and management of complaints. What GAO Recommends GAO recommends that DHS establish a process to assess time in custody data for all individuals in holding facilities; issue guidance on how and which complaint mechanisms should be communicated to individuals in short-term custody; include a classification code in all complaint tracking systems related to DHS holding facilities; and develop a process for analyzing trends related to holding facility complaints. DHS concurred with the recommendations and identified planned actions. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2016. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-16-514: Accessed May 27, 2016 at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/677484.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/677484.pdf Shelf Number: 139230 Keywords: Homeland SecurityIllegal Immigrants Immigrant Detention Immigration Immigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: New Jersey Advocates for Immigrant Detainees Title: Isolated in Essex: Punishing Immigrants through Solitary Confinement Summary: Immigration detention is intended to ensure the appearance of immigrants at removal proceedings and is meant to be civil and non-punitive, yet immigrant detainees are held in penal facilities and subjected to the same conditions as individuals accused or convicted of crimes, including solitary confinement. The troublesome use of solitary confinement in state and federal penal institutions and its severe mental health consequences are often the focus of national discourse, but the specific impact of solitary confinement on immigrant detainee populations has received less attention. In 2015, the New Jersey Advocates for Immigrant Detainees (NJAID) and the New York University School of Law Immigrant Rights Clinic (IRC) published a report describing the use of solitary confinement as a disciplinary measure in two of the three New Jersey county jails that house immigrant detainees. This report completes the picture by presenting an analysis of previously unavailable data regarding the use of disciplinary solitary confinement ("disciplinary segregation") against immigrant detainees in Essex County Correctional Facility (Essex), the third and largest immigration detention facility in New Jersey. Essex produced 446 incident reports for the period covering 2013, 2014, and 2015. An analysis of these reports reveals that the use of solitary confinement in Essex is excessive and disproportionate, implemented in an arbitrary fashion, and lacking in adequate due process and transparency. Essex routinely "stacks" charges, meaning it charges a detainee with multiple offenses for a single incident, thus circumventing New Jersey's 15-day limit on a solitary confinement sentence for a single charge, intended to be for clearly separate discrete acts. Furthermore, detainees regularly face solitary confinement during pre-hearing detention before there has been any finding of guilt. The data also demonstrates that many of the incidents leading to solitary confinement in Essex are related to frustration over the jail's conditions. The conditions in a detention center are inherently stressful for detainees and staff alike, and the data shows that allowing officers the authority to mete out solitary confinement as a disciplinary measure in that context results in excessive and arbitrary punishments. Details: Philadelphia: American Friends Service Committee, 2016. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 15, 2016 at: https://afsc.org/sites/afsc.civicactions.net/files/documents/Isolated%20in%20Essex%20Full%20Report%202016_1.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://afsc.org/sites/afsc.civicactions.net/files/documents/Isolated%20in%20Essex%20Full%20Report%202016_1.pdf Shelf Number: 139641 Keywords: Immigrant DetentionSegregationSolitary ConfinementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Garcia-Leys, Sean Title: Mislabeled: Allegations of Gang Membership and Their Immigration Consequences Summary: Gang allegations made by law enforcement agents frequently prevent undocumented immigrants from gaining legal status for which they would be otherwise eligible. These allegations, made without any of the hallmarks of due process, also increase the likelihood an undocumented immigrant will be prioritized for deportation or held in immigration detention. Policy makers, elected officials, and even the law enforcement agents who make these gang allegations are often unaware of the immigration effects of these allegations. This report documents the findings of the UC Irvine School of Law Immigrant Rights Clinic (IRC) based on the IRC's legal representation of affected immigrants, collaboration with community organizations and other legal service providers, interviews with law enforcement agents, and review of scholarly literature. First, the IRC found that gang allegations have a high risk of error as they are primarily made based on the subjective beliefs of law enforcement agents in the field and are usually made without any connection to a specific crime. This high risk of error is corroborated by the fact that these allegations are overwhelmingly made against African-Americans and Latinos. Second, the IRC learned that these allegations are stored in computer databases that are networked to other agencies, including Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Third, the IRC learned that these allegations negatively affect the eligibility of undocumented immigrants for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and other forms of immigration relief. Fourth, the IRC learned that gang allegations also affect the treatment of immigrants held in immigration detention. Considering these findings, the IRC recommends that law enforcement agencies be required to: (1) provide notice to every person who law enforcement agents document as a gang member, (2) improve existing notice practices, and (3) offer neutral review hearings where people erroneously documented as gang members may contest that documentation. By providing these basic hallmarks of due process to those law enforcement agents suspect of gang membership, the risk of unintended immigration harms to people erroneously documented as gang members can be greatly reduced Details: Irvine, CA: University of California Irvine, School of Law, Immigrant Rights Clinic, 2016. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 22, 2016 at: http://www.law.uci.edu/academics/real-life-learning/clinics/ucilaw-irc-MislabeledReport.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.uci.edu/academics/real-life-learning/clinics/ucilaw-irc-MislabeledReport.pdf Shelf Number: 140417 Keywords: False AccusationsGang MembershipUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Eagly, Ingrid Title: Access to Counsel in Immigration Court Summary: It has long been the case that immigrants have a right to counsel in immigration court, but that expense has generally been borne by the non-citizen. Because deportation is classified as a civil rather than a criminal sanction, immigrants facing removal are not afforded the constitutional protections under the Sixth Amendment that are provided to criminal defendants. Whereas in the criminal justice system, all defendants facing even one day in jail are provided an attorney if they cannot afford one, immigrants facing deportation generally do not have that opportunity. Detained immigrants, particularly those held in remote locations, face the additional obstacle of accessing counsel from behind bars. Yet, in every immigration case, the government is represented by a trained attorney who can argue for deportation, regardless of whether the immigrant is represented. The lack of appointed counsel may have a profound impact on immigrants' ability to receive a fair hearing. Past research has highlighted the importance of counsel for asylum seekers, and regional studies have highlighted the important role attorneys play for immigrants navigating immigration courts in New York and San Francisco. Yet, up to now, the debate about access to counsel has proceeded with little reliable national information on how many immigrants facing deportation obtain attorneys, the barriers to accessing representation, and how such representation impacts the outcomes of their cases. This report presents the results of the first national study of access to counsel in U.S. immigration courts. Drawing on data from over 1.2 million deportation cases decided between 2007 and 2012, the report provides much-needed information about the scope and impact of attorney representation in U.S. immigration courts. Details: Washington, DC: American Immigration Council, 2016. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 24, 2016 at: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/access_to_counsel_in_immigration_court.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/access_to_counsel_in_immigration_court.pdf Shelf Number: 140826 Keywords: DeportationImmigrant DetentionImmigration CourtsImmigration EnforcementRight to CounselUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: De Genova, Nicholas Title: Detention, Deportation, and Waiting: Toward a Theory of Migrant Detainability Summary: The global expansion of deportation regimes has spurred an analogous expansion of migrant detention. Arguably even more than the onerous punitive power of deportation, detention imposes the sovereign power of a state on to the lives of non-citizens in a manner that transmutes their status into de facto legal non-personhood. That is to say, with detention, the condition of deportable migrants culminates in summary (and sometimes indefinite) incarceration on the basis of little more than their sheer existential predicament as “undesirable” non-citizens, often with little or no recourse to any form of legal remedy or appeal, and frequently no semblance to due process. Castigated to a station outside the law, their detention leaves them at the mercy of the caprices of authorities. The author argues that to adequately comprehend the productivity of this power to detain migrants, we must have recourse to a concept of detainability, the possibility of being detained. The paper situates the analysis of immigration detention in the framework of contemporary critical theory, interrogating the economy of different conditionalities and contingencies that undergird various degrees by which distinct categories of migrants are subjected to detention power. Details: Geneva, SWIT: Global Detention Project, 2016. 10p. Source: Internet Resource: https://www.globaldetentionproject.org/detention-deportation-waiting-toward-theory-migrant-detainability-gdp-working-paper-no-18 Year: 2016 Country: International URL: https://www.globaldetentionproject.org/detention-deportation-waiting-toward-theory-migrant-detainability-gdp-working-paper-no-18 Shelf Number: 147936 Keywords: DeportationIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DetentionImmigrantsUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Human Rights Watch Title: A Price Too High: US Families Torn Apart by Deportations for Drug Offenses Summary: The United States is home to 13 million lawful permanent residents and 11 million unauthorized immigrants. Over two million immigrants have been deported by the Obama administration. While the government claims to focus on deporting serious, dangerous criminals, data obtained by Human Rights Watch shows that over a quarter of a million deportations from 2007 to 2012 involved non-citizens whose most serious conviction was for a drug offense. And, increasingly, individuals are being deported following convictions for drug possession. This trend contrasts sharply with the reforms many US states are undertaking to legalize, decriminalize, or offer drug treatment instead of prison for low-level drug offenders. A Price Too High is based on interviews with over 130 affected individuals, family members, attorneys, advocates, and law enforcement officials, as well as previously unavailable government data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. The report documents the scope of the problem, including a 43 percent increase between 2007 and 2012 in the number of individuals deported following drug possession convictions. It shows how lawful permanent residents and unauthorized immigrants with strong ties to the US, including US citizen family members, regularly face mandatory detention without bond and deportation for offenses so minor they resulted little or no jail time under criminal law. Even expunged or pardoned convictions can trigger deportation. The consequences are devastating for immigrants, their families, and communities. Human Rights Watch urges US lawmakers to reform immigration laws to eliminate deportation based on simple possession convictions alone, and to ensure that all non-citizens in deportation proceedings, including those with convictions for drug offenses, have access to an individualized hearing where the immigration judge can weigh evidence of family ties, rehabilitation, and other equities against a criminal conviction. Details: New York: HRW, 2015. 99p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 16, 2016 at: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/us0615_ForUpload_0.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/us0615_ForUpload_0.pdf Shelf Number: 146128 Keywords: DeportationsDrug OffendersImmigrant DeportationImmigration Law EnforcementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Wong, Tom K. Title: The Effects of Sanctuary Policies on Crime and the Economy Summary: As the Trump administration begins to implement its immigration policy agenda, the issue of local assistance with federal immigration enforcement officials is back in the spotlight. So-called sanctuary jurisdictions are one focus of that debate. Sanctuary counties - as defined by this report - are counties that do not assist federal immigration enforcement officials by holding people in custody beyond their release date. Using an Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, dataset obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the Immigrant Legal Resource Center, the analyses in this report provide new insights about how sanctuary counties perform across a range of social and economic indicators when compared to nonsanctuary counties. To understand the effects of having a sanctuary policy, we statistically match counties based on a broad range of demographic characteristics and then compare sanctuary counties to nonsanctuary counties to better understand the effects that sanctuary policies have on a local jurisdiction. The data are clear: Crime is statistically significantly lower in sanctuary counties compared to nonsanctuary counties. Moreover, economies are stronger in sanctuary counties - from higher median household income, less poverty, and less reliance on public assistance to higher labor force participation, higher employment-to-population ratios, and lower unemployment. Among the main findings: There are, on average, 35.5 fewer crimes committed per 10,000 people in sanctuary counties compared to nonsanctuary counties. Median household annual income is, on average, $4,353 higher in sanctuary counties compared to nonsanctuary counties. The poverty rate is 2.3 percent lower, on average, in sanctuary counties compared to nonsanctuary counties. Unemployment is, on average, 1.1 percent lower in sanctuary counties compared to nonsanctuary counties. While the results hold true across sanctuary jurisdictions, the sanctuary counties with the smallest populations see the most pronounced effects. Altogether, the data suggest that when local law enforcement focuses on keeping communities safe, rather than becoming entangled in federal immigration enforcement efforts, communities are safer and community members stay more engaged in the local economy. This in turn brings benefits to individual households, communities, counties, and the economy as a whole. Details: Washington, DC: Center for American Progress; National Immigration Law Center, 2017. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 6, 2017 at: https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Effects-Sanctuary-Policies-Crime-and-Economy-2017-01-26.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Effects-Sanctuary-Policies-Crime-and-Economy-2017-01-26.pdf Shelf Number: 146030 Keywords: Economics and CrimeImmigrants and CrimeImmigration PolicySanctuary PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Caicedo, David A. Title: Alien, Illegal, Undocumented: Labeling, Context, and Worldview in the Immigration Debate and in the Lives of Undocumented Youth Summary: A key element of investigating attitudes towards unauthorized immigrants in the United States has been political orientation, yet few studies have examined the influence of such orientation on labels relevant to the immigration debate. The current dissertation project examined these attitudes among young adults using survey, focus group, and interview methodologies. Level of agreement on various statements regarding unauthorized immigrants was examined in Study I, definitions given for the labels 'illegal' and 'undocumented' were explored in Study II, and the lived experience of undocumented youth in two community colleges was investigated in Study III. It was hypothesized that: I) attitudes concerning unauthorized immigrants are a function of present social labels, regardless of political orientation; II) social label definitions reflect distinct cognitive processes; and III) the lived experiences of undocumented students reflect the respective social environments of an urban and suburban community college. Participants in Study I were 744 (463 urban/272 suburban) young adults, all who were recruited from "New York Community College" (NYCC, urban) and "New Jersey Community College" (NJCC, suburban); participants in Study II were 14 (8 NYCC, 6 NJCC) young adults; and participants in Study III were 7 (4 NYCC, 3 NJCC) young adults. Participants in Study I were asked to complete an attitude on unauthorized immigrants scale, followed by the General System Justification scale, and finally a self-reported social label exposure measure. Participants in Study II were asked to generate definitions for the labels 'illegal' and 'undocumented'. Participants in Study III were asked about their life experiences as undocumented young adults in either NY or NJ. Contrary to hypothesis I, statistical analysis demonstrated that the priming of social labels did not account for attitudes, but it was rather the participants’ college that reflected divergent attitudes. Moreover, urban college students reported seeing and hearing the term ‘undocumented’ more often from others, while suburban college students reported seeing and hearing the terms 'illegal' and 'alien' more. Values analysis in Study II demonstrated a pattern of dichotomous and legal-centered thinking with the 'illegal' definitions, while situational and circumstantial thinking was present with the 'undocumented' definitions. Values analysis in Study III reflected a pattern of shared and unshared beliefs and principles regarding themselves, others, and the future centered on "growing up undocumented" in NY and NJ. Specifically, regardless of location, students who reported being undocumented held values concerning perseverance and the need to hide their status but also to be understood by others; while depending on location, values either reflected the importance of improving one's family condition, or one’s own personal trajectory. Findings are discussed in the context of the U.S. immigration debate discourse. Implications for understanding how the presence of others and social labels influence sociopolitical attitudes, as well as how social environment directly impacts psychological development in undocumented youth, are considered. Details: New York: City University of New York, 2016. 170p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed March 20, 2017 at: http://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1794&context=gc_etds Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1794&context=gc_etds Shelf Number: 144520 Keywords: Illegal AliensIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrationMigrantsUndocumented ImmigrantsUndocumented PersonsUndocumented Youth |
Author: Great Britain. National Audit Office Title: Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre Summary: This investigation focuses on the new contract management arrangements and the relationships of the commissioning bodies, the Home Office and NHS England, with their contractors, Serco and G4S. It looks at the extent to which these were a factor in criticisms of Yarl's Wood, specifically those arising from the various reviews. Rationale for work 1 Yarl's Wood is an Immigration Removal Centre (IRC) that provides secure accommodation for women, adult families and, on a short-term basis, men whose cases are being assessed. The largely female and transient population at Yarl's Wood has complex needs. Residents can come from many different countries of origin, are often vulnerable and can suffer from mental health issues. Yarl's Wood has often been subject to considerable scrutiny. As the main IRC for women in the UK, it has been a focus of substantial public and media concern about the detention of women and children. 2 Yarl's Wood has been run by contractors, on behalf of government, since it opened in 2001. The Home Office is responsible for all aspects of Yarl's Wood except healthcare, which is now commissioned by NHS England. Following the award of new contracts, Serco has run the residential services under contract to the Home Office since April 2015 and G4S has run the health services under contract to NHS England since September 2014. Prior to that, Serco provided all services under contract to the Home Office. 3 In March 2015, a Channel 4 undercover documentary on Yarl's Wood made allegations about the way residents were treated by staff. The documentary coincided with the start of the new Serco contract. It was closely followed by an unannounced inspection of the centre by HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) and the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in April 2015. Since then, there have been a further four independent reviews. These were led by Kate Lampard for Serco, Stephen Shaw for the Home Office, Bedford Borough Council's Adult Services and Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the CQC. The reviews covered different aspects of the performance of Serco and G4S. The Home Office, NHS England, Serco and G4S subsequently drew up plans to respond to the reviews, and are introducing changes. Figure 1 overleaf sets out the key events at Yarl's Wood. Details: London: NAO, 2016. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: HC 508 SESSION 2016-17 7 JULY 2016: https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Yarls-Wood-Immigration-Removal-Centre.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Yarls-Wood-Immigration-Removal-Centre.pdf Shelf Number: 144601 Keywords: Asylum Seekers Costs of Corrections Immigrant Detention Immigration Immigration Enforcement Private Prisons Privatization Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Schultheis, Ryan Title: A Revolving Door No More? A Statistical Profile of Mexican Adults Repatriated from the United States Summary: Repeat migration is slowing significantly for Mexican adults removed from the United States. An official survey of Mexican adults removed or voluntarily returned by the U.S. government found an 80 percent drop in the number intending to seek re-entry, from 471,000 in 2005 to 95,000 in 2015. Overall, the share of Mexican returnees saying they intended to return to the United States fell from 95 percent in 2005 to 49 percent in 2015. This stark shift in the decision-making of Mexican returnees represents an important aspect of the changing dynamics of U.S.-Mexico migration - one worth considering as U.S. policymakers contemplate appropriating vast new sums for additional border enforcement. This report provides a statistical profile of Mexican adults repatriated from the United States between 2005 and 2015. Using representative data collected in the Mexican Northern Border Survey (EMIF Norte) and repatriation data from the Mexican Interior Ministry, it explores the demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of deportees, their immigration histories, and information on their future migration plans and minor children left behind in the United States. While a number of factors likely contribute to the decision of repatriated adults to forgo repeat illegal migration and instead remain in Mexico, this trend has profound implications for governments and communities on both sides of the border. For Mexico, it highlights the importance of building out reception services to ensure the successful social and economic reintegration of repatriated Mexican adults who can contribute to future economic growth in Mexico. Such programs, as well as economic conditions in both Mexico and the United States, will determine whether the revolving door of migration continues to slow. Details: Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2017. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 4, 2017 at: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/revolving-door-no-more-statistical-profile-mexican-adults-repatriated-united-states Year: 2017 Country: Mexico URL: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/revolving-door-no-more-statistical-profile-mexican-adults-repatriated-united-states Shelf Number: 145308 Keywords: Border EnforcementIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DeportationImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Barciela,Franco Title: Broward Transitional Center: A 'Model' for Civil Detention Summary: When Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced plans to reform our nation's troubled immigrant detention facility in 2009, ICE promoted the Broward Transitional Center (BTC) as a model for "civil" detention. ICE Chief John Morton noted that BTC only housed nonviolent detainees, among them asylum seekers. An ICE detention reform list of accomplishments further noted that BTC "offers a less restrictive, yet secure environment." AI Justice's response, as then noted in the New York Times, remains unchanged. BTC may offer a better environment than a local jail, but the vast majority of its detainees have committed no crimes or only minor infractions. They are precisely the population that ICE should release: people who pose no threat to their communities and should not be locked up in detention, even if it is a less punitive detention. Ensuring that ICE does not detain people needlessly is particularly urgent now, as immigration reform is percolating in Congress. Even as we were finalizing this report, ICE was releasing thousands of immigrant detainees across the nation because of looming federal budget cuts triggered by sequestration. Details: Miami, FL: Americans for Immigrant Justice, 2013. 72p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 5, 2017 at: http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/aijustice/pages/284/attachments/original/1390429868/BTC-A-Model-for-Civil-Detention.pdf?1390429868 Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/aijustice/pages/284/attachments/original/1390429868/BTC-A-Model-for-Civil-Detention.pdf?1390429868 Shelf Number: 145321 Keywords: Asylum SeekersImmigrant DetentionImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Anderson, Jill Title: Bilingual, Bicultural, Not Yet Binational: Undocumented Immigrant Youth in Mexico and the United States Summary: An entire generation of children, adolescents and young adults has been caught in the crucible of increasing criminalization of immigrants coupled with neoliberal globalization policies in Mexico and the United States. These are first- and second-generation immigrant youth who are bicultural, often bilingual, but rarely recognized as binational citizens in either of their countries. In the United States, Mexican immigrants account for an estimated 28 percent of the immigrant population (the largest origin group) and 56 percent among the undocumented immigrant population (Zong and Batalova 2016). Since 2005, an estimated two million Mexicans have returned to Mexico after having lived in the United States, including over 500,000 U.S.-born children (Gonzalez-Barrera 2015, Jacobo and Espinosa 2015). As of 2005, the population of Mexican-origin immigrant youth in the United States (first- and second-generation) reached an estimated 6.9 million. They have come of age in conditions of extreme vulnerability due to their undocumented status or the undocumented status of their parents. As of 2015, about 10 percent of the undocumented bicultural immigrant youth population has significant although precarious legal protections under Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) while a little over 15 percent of Mexican-American immigrant youth now live in conditions of exile from the United States under automatic bans assigned to them or their caretakers post-deportation and return. The majority of undocumented immigrant youth live in the United States within the legal limbo between the two possibilities of "protected status" and "exile," but under the constant threat of the latter. A crisis of terms and a scarcity of accurate, quantitative data about undocumented, mixed-status, and in particular, deported/returning immigrants continue to challenge efforts to articulate and advocate for adequate public policies. We do know that the returning population since 2005 is younger, returns as a part of a family unit, returns under duress, has spent more years in the United States, and is predominately male. The challenges that immigrant youth face in the aftermath of deportation and return are varied. Emotional distress, post-traumatic stress syndrome, depression and alienation are commonly described as key factors during the first months to years of return. These young people have experienced family separation, a sense of alienation, and human rights violations during detention and deportation. Systemic and inter-personal discrimination against deportees and migrants among the non-migrant population in Mexico can make an already challenging situation more difficult. For some, an accent, a lack of language proficiency in Spanish, and/or tattoos make it difficult to "blend in," find jobs, or continue their studies. In addition to emotional and socio-cultural stress, there are also facing systemic educational, employment and political barriers to local integration and stability. The Mexican federal government's response to its returning citizens has exclusively emphasized crisis-management during the initial days of return and has been characterized by an ad hoc response: re-naming old programs as opposed to re-imagining and adapting them to a decidedly new paradigm. This paper gestures towards an alternative. The Mexican government can build on the constructive and successful models of policy design, programming and implementation within the Ministry of Foreign Relations (SRE) and the Institute for Mexicans Abroad (IME) amongst Mexican immigrants in the United States over the last twenty years. By replicating initiatives first taken abroad, the 45 SRE delegation offices across Mexico that are primarily dedicated to passport services might begin to collaborate with returning immigrant families and local institutions to include services that also support integration via legal identity, education, employment, public health, and cultural activities. Just as consulates across the United States have evolved to include and respond to the needs of immigrants and local institutions in the United States, the SRE delegation offices in Mexico can evolve with a focus on return immigrant families in their local and global contexts. Furthermore, the U.S. and Mexican governments must collaborate on a multi-year binational commission of government actors, civil society leaders, academics, and members of transnational mixed-status immigrant families to produce a broad quantitative study of transnational families using differentiated indicators such as age, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity/race, language(s), self-proscribed identity, immigration status, educational aspirations, and public health. This study must move beyond, although not away from the emphasis on pathways to citizenship for Mexican immigrants in the United States, to focus on family reunification, education, and legal mobility for transnational families in transnational contexts. Bicultural immigrant youth are an integral part of mixed-status transnational families who increasingly have members on both sides of the militarized U.S.-Mexico border. They need public policies that are crafted in terms of the recognition, unification (temporary or permanent) and integration of their families. Furthermore, their integration into the community of their choice must be predicated upon access to education (including higher education), employment, and international mobility as bi-national citizens. By re-framing the debate over immigration as a broader conversation about the constellation of public policy reforms needed to govern transnational movement and citizenship in the twenty-first century, we can better articulate just what is at stake in a major historical shift that has only begun. Details: Washington, DC: Wilson Center, Mexico Institute, 2016. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 8, 2017 at: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/bilingual_bicultural_not_yet_binational_undocumented_immigrant_youth_in_mexico_and_the_united_states.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Mexico URL: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/bilingual_bicultural_not_yet_binational_undocumented_immigrant_youth_in_mexico_and_the_united_states.pdf Shelf Number: 145354 Keywords: Criminalization of ImmigrantsImmigrant YouthImmigrantsImmigrationMigrantsUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Leyro, Shirley P. Title: The Fear Factor: Exploring the Impact of the Vulnerability to Deportation on Immigrants' Lives Summary: This qualitative study explores the impact that the fear of deportation has on the lives of noncitizen immigrants. More broadly, it explores the role that immigration enforcement, specifically deportation, plays in disrupting the process of integration, and the possible implications of this interruption for immigrants and their communities. The study aims to answer: (1) how vulnerability to deportation specifically impacts an immigrant's life, and (2) how the vulnerability to deportation, and the fear associated with it, impacts an immigrant's degree of integration. Data were gathered through a combination of six open-ended focus group interviews of 10 persons each, and 33 individual in-depth interviews, all with noncitizen immigrants. The findings reveal several ways in which the vulnerability to deportation impacted noncitizen immigrants' lives: the fear of deportation produces emotional and psychological distress, which leads immigrants to have negative perceptions of reception into the United States, all which create barriers to integration. In addition, the findings reveal that the fear of deportation and the resulting psychological distress constitutes a form of legal violence. Legal violence is an emerging framework by Menjivar & Abrego (2012) that builds upon structural and symbolic violence, and refers to state-sanctioned harm perpetuated against immigrants via harsh immigration laws. The fear of deportation, combined with the structural reality of legal violence, creates an environment that impedes integration. The effect of deportability on immigrants' lives is of interest on the level of both individual integration and community cohesion. Details: New York: City University of New York, 2017. 196p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed July 29, 2017 at: http://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1681/ Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1681/ Shelf Number: 146609 Keywords: DeportationImmigrantsImmigration and CrimeImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Goldstein, Brian Title: The Effect of Immigration Detainers in a Post-Relignment California Summary: On October 1, 2011, California implemented AB 109 Public Safety Realignment, which transferred state responsibility for individuals who commit non-violent, non-serious, and non-sexual offenses to the 58 counties and their local jurisdictions. Since then, each county has responded differently to Realignment, with some seizing on this unique opportunity to adopt innovative community corrections programming and rehabilitative services. Other counties continue to depend on the state system to manage individuals who have committed low-level offenses (CJCJ, 2013). Some counties struggle with jail capacity issues while failing to adopt necessary alternative sentencing practices (PPIC, 2013). On August 2, 2013, the United States Supreme Court denied Governor Jerry Brown's attempt to delay reducing the state prison system by approximately 10,000 individuals, as required by federal litigation that resulted in AB 109. The state must now work diligently to deemphasize the unnecessary use of incarceration in order to preserve resources for more crucial priorities. Amid varying county responses to Realignment, fiscal constraints, and capacity issues, county jail facilities also hold significant numbers of undocumented immigrants who do not have serious criminal histories, other than potentially violating federal civil immigration laws. For ease of reference, these individuals are here termed "non-criminal ICE holds" given that they have no recorded criminal history. These non-criminal ICE holds are held under ICE Agreements of Cooperation in Communities to Enhance Safety and Security (ACCESS), an umbrella encompassing enforcement programs that specifically target immigrants who make contact with the criminal justice system including the Secure Communities and Criminal Alien Program (ICE, 2008). After identifying individuals under ACCESS, ICE can issue an immigration detainer to law enforcement agencies, which is a non-binding request that an immigrant of interest be detained for up to 48 hours, excluding weekends and federal holidays, so that ICE can assume federal custody to initiate deportation proceedings. This publication studies the impact of non-criminal ICE holds on California's criminal justice system, specifically the effect on county jail capacity, including the significant fiscal cost. It concludes that 89 percent of said detentions in California are held in local jails and facilities. These detentions cost taxpayers approximately $16.3 million for local jail holds during the 30-month period studied. Details: San Francisco: Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 2013. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 2, 2017 at: http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/immigrant_detainers_in_a_post_realignment_ca.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/immigrant_detainers_in_a_post_realignment_ca.pdf Shelf Number: 130014 Keywords: Costs of CorrectionsImmigrant DetentionImmigration EnforcementJail InmatesPublic Safety AlignmentUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Collingwood, Loren Title: Public Opposition to Sanctuary Cities in Texas: Criminal Threat or Latino Threat? Summary: Sanctuary city policies forbid local officials and law enforcement from inquiring into residents' immigration status. Opponents of sanctuary cities, such as President Donald Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and Texas Governor Gregg Abbott, frequently claim that sanctuary policies lead to higher crime rates, despite evidence to the contrary (Gonzalez et al., 2017; Lyons et al., 2013; Wong, 2017). Given this crime narrative, we might expect public opinion about sanctuary cities to be driven primarily by concern of and contextual experience with crime. However, given that sanctuary cities are associated with undocumented immigration, and that undocumented immigration is inextricably linked to Latino - and specifically Mexican - immigration, public opinion on sanctuary cities may instead be driven by experiences with racial and cultural threat embodied by rapid Latino growth. We analyze two polls from Texas, a state where the sanctuary debate is highly salient - not only because of its long border with Mexico, but because its governor has fought against such cities, signing highly controversial legislation. We find that opinion on sanctuary cities is unrelated to respondents' county crime rates but is strongly related to county Latino growth and Latino population size. We find some evidence that sanctuary city opinion is related to individual concerns about both immigration and crime. Overall, beyond partisan and ideological staples, we conclude that opinion on sanctuary cities is driven primarily by racial threat and not by actual crime exposure. Details: Riverside, CA: Collingwood Research, 2017. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 1, 2017 at: http://www.collingwoodresearch.com/uploads/8/3/6/0/8360930/collingwood_gonzalez_final.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.collingwoodresearch.com/uploads/8/3/6/0/8360930/collingwood_gonzalez_final.pdf Shelf Number: 148666 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicySanctuary CitiesUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Collingwood, Loren Title: Sustained Organizational Influence: American Legislative and the Diffusion of Anti-Sanctuary Policy Summary: Policy diffusion across the U.S. states is perhaps one of the most investigated topics in the study of U.S. state politics. Building upon existing literature, we offer a particular model of policy diffusion - which we call sustained organizational influence. Sustained organizational influence necessitates an institutional focus across a broad range of issues and across a long period of time. Sustaining organizations are well-financed, and exert their influence on legislators through perks, shared ideological interests, and time-saving opportunities. Sustaining organizations' centralized nature makes legislators' jobs easier by providing legislators with ready-made model legislation. We argue that sustaining organizations contribute to policy diffusion in the U.S. states. We evaluate this model with a case study of state-level immigration sanctuary policy making and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). Through quantitative text analysis and several negative binomial state-level regression models, we demonstrate that ALEC has exerted an overwhelming influence on the introduction of anti-sanctuary legislative proposals in the U.S. states over the past 7 years consistent with our model of policy diffusion. Implications are discussed. Details: Riverside, CA: Collingwood Research, 2017. 53p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 1, 2017 at: http://www.collingwoodresearch.com/uploads/8/3/6/0/8360930/sustained-organizational-influence__1_.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.collingwoodresearch.com/uploads/8/3/6/0/8360930/sustained-organizational-influence__1_.pdf Shelf Number: 148667 Keywords: Illegal Immigrants Immigrants Immigration Enforcement Immigration Policy Sanctuary Cities Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Lasch, Christopher N. Title: Understanding "Sanctuary Cities" Summary: In the wake of Trump's election, a growing number of local jurisdictions around the country have sought to disentangle their criminal justice system from federal immigration enforcement initiatives. These localities have embraced a series of reforms that protect immigrants from deportation when they come into contact with the criminal justice system. In response, President Trump and his administration have labeled these jurisdictions "sanctuary cities" and promised to "end" them by cutting off federal funding. This Article is a collaborative project authored by law professors specializing in the intersection between immigration and criminal law. In it, we set forth the central features of the Trump administration's mass deportation plans and his recently-announced campaign to "crack down" on "sanctuary cities." We then outline the diverse ways in which localities have sought to protect their residents from deportation by refusing to participate in the Trump immigration agenda. Such initiatives include limiting compliance with immigration detainers, precluding participation in joint operations with the federal government, and preventing immigration agents from accessing local jails. Finally, we analyze the legal and policy justifications for sanctuary that local jurisdictions have advanced with increasing intensity since Trump's election. These insights have important implications for how sanctuary cities are understood and preserved in the age of Trump. As a complement to this Article, we have created a public online library of sanctuary policies that includes all the policies cited here and many more we considered in our research. Details: Forthcoming in 58 BOSTON COLLEGE LAW REVIEW (2018). 62p. Source: Internet Resource: UCLA School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 17-33 New England Law|Boston Research Paper No. 18-02: Accessed February 6, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3045527 Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3045527 Shelf Number: 149009 Keywords: AsylumCrimigrationIllegal ImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicySanctuary CitiesUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Lott, John R., Jr. Title: Undocumented Immigrants, U.S. Citizens, and Convicted Criminals in Arizona Summary: Using newly released detailed data on all prisoners who entered the Arizona state prison from January 1985 through June 2017, we are able to separate non-U.S. citizens by whether they are illegal or legal residents. This data do not rely on self-reporting by criminals. Undocumented immigrants are at least 142% more likely to be convicted of a crime than other Arizonans. They also tend to commit more serious crimes and serve 10.5% longer sentences, more likely to be classified as dangerous, and 45% more likely to be gang members than U.S. citizens. Yet, there are several reasons that these numbers are likely to underestimate the share of crime committed by undocumented immigrants. There are dramatic differences between in the criminal histories of convicts who are U.S. citizens and undocumented immigrants. Young convicts are especially likely to be undocumented immigrants. While undocumented immigrants from 15 to 35 years of age make up slightly over 2 percent of the Arizona population, they make up almost 8% of the prison population. Even after adjusting for the fact that young people commit crime at higher rates, young undocumented immigrants commit crime at twice the rate of young U.S. citizens. These undocumented immigrants also tend to commit more serious crimes. If undocumented immigrants committed crime nationally as they do in Arizona, in 2016 they would have been responsible for over 1,000 more murders, 5,200 rapes, 8,900 robberies, 25,300 aggravated assaults, and 26,900 burglaries. Details: Crime Prevention Research Center, 2018. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3099992 Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3099992 Shelf Number: 149028 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigrants and CrimeImmigrationMigrantsUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: Smith, Jinkinson Title: Illegal Immigration and Violent Crime Rates in the United States, 2009-2014 Summary: The question of whether illegal immigration is positively related to crime rates in the United States has been heavily publicized since current U.S. president Donald Trump announced his candidacy for president in 2015. This study explores the relationship between changes in illegal immigration and changes in violent crime rates at the state level during the period from 2009 to 2014. Data came from the Pew Research Center and the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports. It is found that changes in the percent of a population made up of undocumented immigrants is not significantly correlated with changes in violent crime rates among U.S. states for which data on both parameters exist (n=13), consistent with previous research on this topic. Details: Unpublished paper, 2018. 4p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 2,1 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3120820 Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3120820 Shelf Number: 149199 Keywords: Crime Statistics Illegal Immigrants Immigrants and Crime Undocumented ImmigrantsViolent Crime |
Author: New York Immigration Coalition Title: Swept Up in the Sweep: The Impact of Gang Allegations on Immigrant New Yorkers Summary: T he United States is no stranger to the use of expansive profiling and discriminatory policing when facing real or perceived threats to national security. Whether it was the casting of Japanese Americans as traitors during World War II, civil rights leaders as radical threats to the country during the civil rights movement, Americans Muslims as national security threats after September 11th, or young black and brown men as criminals through stop-andfrisk policing-the use of fear and stereotypes to justify discriminatory tactics has repeatedly come at the expense of individuals' constitutional and civil rights. The end result? The dehumanizing of people of color, destabilizing of community structures, chilling of constitutionally protected speech and activity, and ultimately the mass incarceration and deportation of entire communities. The Trump administration has consistently sought to cast immigrants as threats to the economic and national security of the United States. And thus, MS-13, a gang born in the United States and grown in Central America, has become a favorite foil for President Donald Trump, as well as for Attorney General Jeff Sessions and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly. The Trump administration has taken a specific narrative course to elevate the status of MS-13 to a household name, responsible for invading armies of Central American migrants who are using supposed loopholes in immigration law to sow terror in the quiet American suburbs of Long Island. The problem is that the threat of MS-13 is purposely exaggerated to manipulate support for unfettered immigration enforcement in the name of gang-policing, without addressing the effectiveness of such policies or their devastating consequences-the large-scale detention and deportation of Latinx individuals. All empirical evidence shows that MS-13 on Long Island lacks basic organization and coordination. And while MS-13 is undoubtedly violent, the gang is not, by far, responsible for the majority of crimes committed on Long Island or, more broadly, in New York. The Trump administration has created and exploited public fear of MS-13 to further the Administration's own anti-immigrant agenda. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) "Operation Matador" (Matador) launched in 2017 as part of "Operation Community Shield" specifically seeks to "target violent gang members and their associates." The most troubling aspect of Matador is that it leads to increased local law enforcement collaboration with ICE. This collaboration exponentially increases the devastating impacts of discriminatory policing by compounding it with immigration enforcement. Allegations of MS-13 affiliation or membership are routinely made by immigration officers, often without credible evidence or the possibility for an individual to challenge the designation. Schools, local police departments, and federal law enforcement agencies all communicate in secrecy and trap Central American migrants in a growing and obscure web of enforcement. By broadly casting immigrant Latin youth as gang members to be targeted for incarceration and deportation, even the outward pretense of basic rights and due process is pushed to the side. Gang policing, like unconstitutional stop-and-frisk policies, has disproportionately impacted black and brown men. Notoriously flawed and unregulated, gang databases have minimal inclusion criteria. Simply living in a building or even a neighborhood where there are gang members, wearing certain colors or articles of clothing, or speaking to people law enforcement believe to be gang members can lead to inclusion in a gang database. Often individuals do not know they have been listed in such a database, and no mechanism exists to challenge inclusion. Similar vague criteria, such as the apparel an individual wears or a drawing made in a notebook, are used to label Latinx youth and young men as gang affiliated and then to subsequently justify their arrest, detention and deportation. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not need to make any showing of gang affiliation to initiate removal proceedings-being undocumented alone is a sufficient basis. Law enforcement agencies have every incentive to target suspected gang affiliates for deportation when they do not have evidence to make a criminal arrest. Further, since immigration proceedings are not subject to the same evidentiary standards as are required in the criminal context, immigration enforcement takes advantage of these lax standards and introduces allegations of gang involvement with little or no evidence. For those swept up by these overbroad allegations, the effect could be the denial of immigration benefits for which they are otherwise eligible, the denial of immigration bond, and ultimately deportation. To better understand how the Trump administration has used the pretext of gang enforcement to further its anti-immigrant policies, the New York Immigration Coalition (NYIC) and the City University of New York (CUNY) School of Law's Immigrant and Non-Citizen Rights Clinic (INRC) embarked on a survey (LE Interactions Survey) of legal service providers, community-based organizations, and community members in the New York City metro area, including Long Island, detailing how various immigration agencies have gone beyond the publicized gang sweeps and are in fact using gang allegations broadly in the immigration removal and adjudications process. Details: New York: The Coalition, 2018. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 23, 2018 at: http://www.thenyic.org/userfiles/file/SweptUp_Report_Final.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: http://www.thenyic.org/userfiles/file/SweptUp_Report_Final.pdf Shelf Number: 150337 Keywords: GangsIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DeportationImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: PICUM, the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants Title: Untold Stories: immigration Detention and Deportation Summary: In recent years, European migration policy area has undergone a significant shift in political narrative and priorities. The presence of undocumented migrants has been perceived as an innate risk to Europe's common asylum system, the security of Europe's citizens, and even the stability of the European Union itself. Decision makers have been spurred on to appear tough on migration, and have responded by fixing an objective of increasing deportations and stopping certain migratory movements. Seen as a benchmark of success in migration management, the focus on fast-track deportations may lead to a weakening of procedural safeguards, increasing the likelihood of human rights violations and abuse. As a network of civil society organizations working directly with undocumented migrants, PICUM members are confronted daily with individual cases of migrants who are detained and deported from the EU. Through the stories and testimonies that migrants have conveyed about their individual experiences of detention and deportation - which by no means are an exhaustive overview of the situation - six major areas of concern have emerged. Issues around the futility and extreme harmfulness of immigration detention have come strongly to the fore, especially in cases in which children and families are detained. Immigration detention of children is still a reality in Europe, despite the fact that the Committee on the Rights of the Child and other UN experts4 have held that states cannot justify detaining migrant children under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which has been ratified by all EU member states. The consequences of auctioning off migration management tasks to third countries that systematically abuse and harm migrants on their territories are also highlighted. These stories depict cases of extreme violence, torture, humiliation and abuse of power in the deportation process, as well as the more subtle but equally devastating act of separating families through detention and deportation. Asylum seekers and other migrants who are returned to countries that are labelled as "safe" can face disastrous consequences when they are deported. A complete disregard for the risks of deporting people to unsafe situations coupled with the lack of monitoring and accountability mechanisms for governments who deport them are among the key concerns that have emerged through this collection of stories. This booklet sets out each of these areas of concern, and presents them in a succinct way to contextualize them within on-going policy debates. It is intended that the stories can illustrate how certain policy initiatives, existing laws and their implementation (or lack thereof) are responsible for creating conditions which may lead to violations of human rights, suffering and injustice. Details: Brussels: PICUM, 2017. 36p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 25, 2018 at: http://picum.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Deportation_Stories_EN.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Europe URL: http://picum.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Deportation_Stories_EN.pdf Shelf Number: 150371 Keywords: Immigrant DeportationImmigrant DetentionImmigration EnforcementUndocumented ImmigrantsUndocumented Migrants |
Author: Corporate Watch Title: Who is immigration policy for? The media-politics of the Hostile Environment Summary: For 20 years UK governments have continually introduced new immigration control measures, each more vicious than the last. The Conservatives' current "Hostile Environment" approach builds on Blair's legacy: Labour passed five major immigration acts in 1999-2009, dramatically expanding the detention and deportation system and making swingeing attacks on asylum rights. The official aim of all these policies is "control": whether that means simply cutting numbers, or making sure only the "right" kinds of immigrants enter. But, in those terms, none of these clampdowns actually work. Migration figures continue to rise, while the ineffectiveness of vicious Immigration Enforcement measures is an open secret amongst Home Office officials. The level of resources - and violence - required to really seal borders would go well beyond anything yet seen. This report examines the following key points: - Immigration policy isn't really about controlling migration, it's about making a show of control. It is a spectacle, an emotional performance. In practice, this means attacking a few scapegoats seen as "low value" by business - often, the very weakest migrants such as refugees, so-called "illegals", or others without the right documents. - The primary audiences for the spectacle of immigration control are specific "target publics": some older white people who are key voters and media consumers, and who have high anxiety about migration - but who make up only around 20% of the population. - Policies are drawn up by politicians and advisors in close interaction with big media. Political and media elites share a dense "ecology of ideas", and anti-migrant clampdowns are part of their internal jostling for power - votes, promotions, audience share. _ Migration scares and clampdowns are part of a broader pattern - the anxiety engine that drives much of politics today, fuelled by stories of threat and control. Details: London: Corporate Watch, 2018. 62p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 8, 2018 at: https://corporatewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/CW-Who-is-immigration-policy-for.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://corporatewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/CW-Who-is-immigration-policy-for.pdf Shelf Number: 150516 Keywords: Immigrants Immigration Enforcement Immigration Policy Media Campaigns Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Landgrave, Michelangelo Title: Incarcerated Immigrants in 2016: Their Numbers, Demographics, and Countries of Origin Summary: Since taking office, President Donald Trump has expanded interior immigration enforcement and made it easier for states and local governments to apprehend and detain illegal immigrants. His actions are often based on the widespread perception that illegal immigrants are a significant and disproportionate source of crime in the United States. This brief uses American Community Survey data from the U.S. Census Bureau to analyze incarcerated immigrants according to their citizenship and legal status for 2016. The data show that all immigrants-legal and illegal-are less likely to be incarcerated than native-born Americans relative to their shares of the population. By themselves, illegal immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated than native-born Americans. Details: Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2018. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Immigration Research and Policy Brief, No. 7: Accessed June 26, 2018 at: https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/irpb7.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/irpb7.pdf Shelf Number: 150684 Keywords: Illegal Immigrants Immigrants and Crime Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Landgrave, Michelangelo Title: Criminal Immigrants: Their Numbers, Demographics, and Countries of Origin Summary: In his first week in office, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the Department of Homeland Security to deport most illegal immigrants who come in contact with law enforcement. His order is based on the widespread perception that illegal immigrants are a significant source of crime in the United States. This brief uses American Community Survey data to analyze incarcerated immigrants according to their citizenship and legal status. All immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated than natives relative to their shares of the population. Even illegal immigrants are less likely to be incarcerated than native-born Americans. BACKGROUND Estimates of the total criminal noncitizen population vary widely, from about 820,000 according to the Migration Policy Institute to 1.9 million according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), but rarely is the number of those incarcerated estimated. Empirical studies of immigrant criminality generally find that immigrants do not increase local crime rates and are less likely to cause crime than their native-born peers, and that natives are more likely to be incarcerated than immigrants. There are two broad strands of this literature. The first is an area approach that analyzes how immigrants affect crime in locations where they settle, finding a general decrease in crime rates. The second broad strand of research examines immigrant institutionalization rates and uniformly finds that that native-born Americans are more likely to be incarcerated than immigrants as a percentage of their population. Illegal immigrant incarceration rates are not well studied, although one investigation estimated that 4.6 percent of Texas inmates are illegal immigrants while illegal immigrants comprise 6.3 percent of that state's total population. The best research on illegal immigrant crime exploits a natural experiment to see how the removal of illegal immigrants from an area through the Secure Communities (SCOMM) program affects local crime rates. SCOMM was an interior immigration enforcement program started in 2008 that checked the fingerprints of local and state arrestees against federal immigration databases. If ICE suspected the arrestee of being an illegal immigrant, then ICE would issue a detainer to hold the arrestee until ICE could pick them up. The Obama administration ended SCOMM in 2014, but the Trump administration reactivated it. If illegal immigrants were more crime prone than natives, the crime rates in those local areas that were first enrolled in the program should have seen crime decline relative to areas that were not. As it turned out, SCOMM had no significant effect on local crime rates, which means that illegal immigrants were not more crime prone than natives. Details: Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2017. 7p. Source: Internet Resource: Immigration Research and Policy Brief, No. 1: Accessed June 26, 2018 at: https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/immigration_brief-1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/immigration_brief-1.pdf Shelf Number: 150697 Keywords: Illegal Immigrants Immigrants and Crime Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Worster, William Thomas Title: Deporting Dreamers as a Crime Against Humanity Summary: Much has been written about the Dreamers and their moral claim to a right to remain in the US, but what has not explored is whether their removal from the US might implicate international law, and, specifically, whether it would constitute a crime against humanity. On its face, it seems to be an outrageous claim: that deporting non-citizens from a state would be a criminal act. International law protects a state's ability to remove unlawfully present aliens. This is not in debate. The argument is, however, far more narrow. Specifically, the forcible, arbitrary deportation of Dreamers with an intent to permanently remove them from their residence that is protected under international law would be criminal. This article will first consider the current law on the crime against humanity of deportation. The crime, which has a considerable pedigree, prohibits individuals from pursuing deportation of persons in certain situations. Among the key considerations is that the crime does not only apply to the forcible removal of citizens, but also to non-citizens in some circumstances. The distinction is whether the person is lawfully present in the state and that the removal is unlawful. As befitting an international crime, both of these standards are measured by international law, not domestic law. The article then considers the case of the Dreamers. While it is true that they do not have US nationality or other authorized status, and thus a right to remain in the US under domestic law, they do have strong enough ties to consider the US their "own country", a wider concept that nationality. Once an individual has an "own country", he or she may not be arbitrarily removed from than state under international human rights law, unless the removal can be justified as non-discriminatory, necessary and proportionate to the risk to society. Further, under international human rights law, permissible cases of removal are very few. The removal of a non-criminal minor from the US with a long-standing home there cannot be justified as necessary and proportionate. Provided that the possible future removal was by force, in pursuit of a policy as such, committed with intent, and that the removals were widespread and systematic, then the removal would be a crime against humanity. Details: Unpublished paper, 2018. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 27, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3180654 Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3180654 Shelf Number: 150711 Keywords: Deportation Dreamers Human Rights Abuses Immigrants Immigration Enforcement Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Penn State Law Center for Immigrants' Rights Title: Imprisoned Justice: Inside Two Georgia Immigrant Detention Centers Summary: Project South and the Penn State Law Center for Immigrants' Rights Clinic (on its behalf) have released a report titled "Imprisoned Justice: Inside Two Georgia Immigration Detention Centers." The report is focused on the Stewart Detention Center and the Irwin County Detention Center and is based on interviews with scores of detained immigrants as well as immigration attorneys, tours of both facilities, and review of contracts and other relevant documents. The investigation was completed over the course of one year. Stewart and Irwin had previously been identified in national reports as among the worst in the country. "As the accounts in the report demonstrate, little has changed at Stewart and Irwin. Life at these facilities for detained immigrants is still a living nightmare," said Azadeh Shahshahani. "It is high time for Stewart and Irwin to be shut down." As detailed in the report, the conditions in these detention facilities are deplorable and include: threats of force-feeding for participation in hunger strikes, sexual abuse, lack of clean drinking water, lack of adequate access to legal materials or attorneys, and labor for just $1 per day. Additionally, detained immigrants report they are served rotten and spoiled food with occasional foreign particles inside. Further, detained immigrants at both facilities lack adequate medical care and mental health services are minimal. Some detained immigrants also complained of not receiving dietary accommodations for religious beliefs and practices or health concerns. The use of solitary is also rampant. Several detained immigrants reported being put in segregation for expressing suicidal thoughts or as retaliation for complaining about detention conditions. As described by one detained immigrant at Stewart who suffers from mental health issues: "Segregation is like hell. It is total isolation." Details: Atlanta: Project South, 2017. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 15, 2018 at: https://projectsouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Imprisoned_Justice_Report-1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://projectsouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Imprisoned_Justice_Report-1.pdf Shelf Number: 151137 Keywords: Human Rights AbusesIllegal Immigrants Immigrant Detention Immigration Enforcement Immigration Policy Migrants Solitary ConfinementUndocumented Immigrants |
Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Criminal Alien Statistics: Information on Incarcerations, Arrests, Convictions, Costs, and Removals Summary: As of 2014, DHS estimated the total alien-a person who is not a citizen or national of the United States- population in the United States was about 27.1 million. Members of the alien population that have been arrested and convicted of crimes in the United States are referred to as criminal aliens. The costs associated with incarcerating criminal aliens are borne by the federal government, states, and localities. GAO was asked to update its March 2011 report on criminal alien statistics. This report addresses, among other things, the (1) number and nationality of incarcerated criminal aliens, (2) number of criminal alien arrests and convictions, (3) estimated costs associated with incarcerating criminal aliens, and (4) experiences of criminal aliens after incarceration in federal prison. GAO analyzed the most recent data available on criminal aliens, generally from fiscal years 2010 through 2016. Specifically, GAO analyzed data for criminal aliens incarcerated in federal prisons from fiscal years 2011 through 2016, and this group is the federal criminal alien population studied for this report. GAO also analyzed data for certain criminal aliens incarcerated in state prisons and local jails that received SCAAP funding from fiscal years 2010 through 2015, and this group is referred to as the state and local study population reviewed for this report. SCAAP data represents a portion of all criminal aliens incarcerated in state prisons and local jails. GAO used SCAAP data because there are no reliable data available on all criminal aliens incarcerated in every U.S. state prison and local jail. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2018. 120p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-18-433: Accessed August 22, 2018 at: https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/693162.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/693162.pdf Shelf Number: 151230 Keywords: Crime Statistics Criminal Aliens Illegal Immigrants Immigrant Detention Immigrants and Crime Undocumented Alien Immigrants Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Hing, Bill Ong Title: Thinking Broadly About Immigration Reform by Addressing Root Causes Summary: The United States is caught up in hysteria, media-induced fear, and misinformation over undocumented immigration. We have militarized the border through "Operation Gatekeeper" pushing border crossers into treacherous terrain, resulting in thousands of unnecessary deaths since the 1990s. We have engaged in Gestapo-type raids of businesses, homes, and neighborhoods, sometimes separating children from their parents. We have arrested and deported lawful permanent resident immigrants who have resided in the United States most of their lives. We have rounded up workers in restaurant sweeps. We have prosecuted human rights volunteers in the Arizona desert who provided food, water, and emergency medical care to the undocumented. We have encouraged private vigilantes to enforce a twisted sense of national security that results in armed ranchers pointing loaded assault weapons at teenage girls and the murder of a nine year old and her father in their living room. Anti-immigrant ordinances and laws fomented by resentment over undocumented workers have been proposed and enacted in states and towns across the country, causing great division in those communities. In the process, we have harmed countless innocent families, wasted billions of dollars, and lost valuable time that would be better spent working to integrate newcomers into our society. In this book chapter, Professor Hing argues that the time has come to think beyond enforcement only approaches - to think creatively. We need to re-think employer sanctions and the harsh consequences of ICE raids that are conducted under the auspices of such laws. We need to think about expanding visa categories that reflect the needs of the regional and global economies in which we are engaged. We must recognize that solving the so-called undocumented immigration challenge only will come with an open-minded approach that recognizes the need to begin helping build the economy and infrastructure of our neighbors to the south. Details: California, 2011. 33p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 14, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1811022 Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=5830780830240950111151231031071001240330190810790370560180990980750990220140860900870620260960280100100470200121100261071060700330730370850881050640191271241191270060600830091231161 Shelf Number: 151531 Keywords: Employer Sanctions Immigration and Customs Enforcement Immigration Reform Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Martinez Flores, Fernanda Title: The Deterrence Effect of Immigration Enforcement in Transit Countries: Evidence from Central American Deportees Summary: Immigration enforcement cooperation between final destination and transit countries has increased in the last decades. However, the question whether these measures are successful in deterring undocumented migrants has not been previously explored by the empirical literature. This paper examines whether the Southern Border Plan, an immigration enforcement program implemented by the Mexican government in 2014, has curbed intentions of unauthorized migrants from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to migrate to the United States. Combining surveys from Central American and Mexican deportees and using a DiD approach, I find that increased enforcement in Mexico decreases the likelihood of attempting repeated unauthorized crossings. The results indicate that in the short-run the cooperation between destination and transit countries could be effective in deterring undocumented migrants. Details: Germany: RUHR, 2018. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 18, 2018 at:https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/rwirep/749.html Year: 2018 Country: International URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/178503/1/1020148748.pdf Shelf Number: 152879 Keywords: Deportees Human Smuggling Human Trafficking Immigration enforcement Migration Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Hoffman, Karen Title: Live Stop: A Law of Unintended Consequences Summary: What is Live Stop? The Live Stop law instructs police officers to immobilize drivers' cars for certain traffic violations including driving without a license, with a suspended or revoked license, and driving with expired or no registration. The law applies only to Philadelphia. Other counties may adopt the law by local ordinance, however, most have not done so. The law instructs that cars should be towed for these violations only as a last resort if the cars pose a threat to public safety. Yet this is often not the case because the Philadelphia Police Department's interpretation of the law goes beyond the state laws requirements by towing first. As this report will demonstrate, this has a disproportionate impact on undocumented immigrants in Philadelphia. Details: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Temple University Beasley School of Law, 2016. 10p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 20, 2019 at: https://www2.law.temple.edu/csj/publication/live-stop-law-unintended-consequences/ Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.sanctuaryphiladelphia.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Live-Stop-Report-Final-Draft.pdf Shelf Number: 154313 Keywords: Driving with a Revoked License Driving with a Suspended License Driving without a License Immigrants Law Enforcement Live Stop Pennsylvania Philadelphia Philadelphia Police Department Police Officers Public Safety Undocumented Immigrants |
Author: Hines, Annie Laurie Title: Immigrants' Deportations, Local Crime and Police Effectiveness Summary: This paper analyzes the impact of immigrant deportations on local crime and police efficiency. Our identification relies on increases in the deportation rate driven by the introduction of the Secure Communities (SC) program, an immigration enforcement program based on local-federal cooperation which was rolled out across counties between 2008 and 2013. We instrument for the deportation rate by interacting the introduction of SC with the local presence of likely undocumented in 2005, prior to the introduction of SC. We document a surge in local deportation rates under SC, and we show that deportations increased the most in counties with a large undocumented population. We find that SC-driven increases in deportation rates did not reduce crime rates for violent offenses or property offenses. Our estimates are small and precise, so we can rule out meaningful effects. We do not find evidence that SC increased either police effectiveness in solving crimes or local police resources. Finally, we do not find effects of deportations on the local employment of unskilled citizens or on local firm creation. Details: Bonn, Germany: Institute of Labor Economics, 2019. 42p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 14, 2019 at: http://ftp.iza.org/dp12413.pdf Year: 2019 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3408311 Shelf Number: 156750 Keywords: Deportation Employment Immigrants Immigration Enforcement Law Enforcement Police Effectiveness Property Crime Secure Communities Undocumented ImmigrantsViolent Crime |
Author: Olson, Eric L. Title: What If They Return?: How El Salvador, Honduras, and the United States Could Prepare for an Effective Reintegration of TPS Beneficiaries Summary: An estimated 332,000 immigrants from El Salvador and Honduras are at risk of losing their legal status in the United States over the next year, and hundreds of thousands of their U.S. citizen children may also be affected directly or indirectly depending on the fate of their parents. Their future in the United States depends on whether their Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is extended, reformed, or terminated. The purpose of this paper is to suggest possible policy approaches El Salvador, Honduras, and the United States could pursue to incentivize the return and effective reintegration of TPS beneficiaries who either choose to return or are required to do so when the program is ended. It is based on the findings of studies and workshops in each country that seek to define the barriers to return and assess existing capacities within each country to receive and reintegrate those who are returning after an average of twenty years away. Furthermore, we seek to identify the kinds of policies that the governments of El Salvador and Honduras could adopt to incentivize the return of TPS beneficiaries and that would make the reintegration process successful. If policies are adequately defined and carried out, we assume a reduction in revolving door migration from the region. Additionally, fully reintegrated TPSers can make a positive contribution to the development and well-being of their country. Additional assumptions include the likelihood that only a fraction of current beneficiaries will return to their countries of origin should the TPS program be discontinued. For many, the challenges of leaving behind their communities, employment, families, and future dreams will be unbearable. It is reasonable to assume that those with options to adjust their legal status - possibly through U.S. citizen family members - will do so. Those that do not have legal options will likely leave for a third country - like many Haitians have done by leaving for Canada - or they will fade into the shadows with no legal status once TPS is terminated. Given the risks and uncertainties associated with moving to a third country or reverting to an undocumented status, creating incentives to return to their homelands is an important alternative. Another assumption is that TPS recipients have benefited significantly from the 17 to 20 years of legal status they have enjoyed in the United States. During this time, they have developed significant employment skills, increased their educational levels, purchased homes, become entrepreneurs, and gained access to capital. Documented status has enabled them to take advantage of the opportunities afforded by the United States economy, education and healthcare systems and, thus, many TPS beneficiaries find themselves in an advantageous position when compared to their compatriots with no legal status. As such, TPS recipients have resources and skills at their disposal that could potentially make reintegration to their countries of origin more successful and may, in fact, represent an important opportunity for development in both El Salvador and Honduras. In the following paragraphs we will review the current status of Salvadoran and Honduran beneficiaries of TPS in the United States; summarize what is known about their socio-economic situation; review possible barriers to their effective return and reintegration to their countries of origin; assess what governmental programs and resources might be available to help with reintegration; and suggest possible policy approaches all three countries could pursue to incentivize a return and effective reintegration. It is our conclusion that failure to take seriously the factors shaping decisions TPS beneficiaries will be forced to make if the program is terminated, and failure to consider policy options that incentivize effective reintegration will lead most to opt for becoming undocumented immigrants in the United States and, in cases where individuals are forced to return, simply further the immigration revolving door or result in new push factors for additional migration. Details: Seattle, Washington: Seattle International Foundation and Wilson Center, 2019. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 2, 2019 at: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/lap_olson_and_wachter.pdf Year: 2019 Country: International URL: https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/what-if-they-return-how-el-salvador-honduras-and-the-united-states-could-prepare-for Shelf Number: 158107 Keywords: Asylum Seekers Illegal Immigration Temporary Protected Status Undocumented Immigrants |