Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 12:07 pm
Time: 12:07 pm
Results for undocumented citizens
7 results foundAuthor: Miles, Thomas J. Title: Does Immigration Enforcement Reduce Crime? Evidence from "Secure Communities" Summary: Does immigration enforcement actually reduce crime? Surprisingly, little evidence exists either way-despite the fact that deporting noncitizens who commit crimes has been a central feature of American immigration law since the early twentieth century. We capitalize on a natural policy experiment to address the question and, in the process, provide the first empirical analysis of the most important deportation initiative to be rolled out in decades. The policy initiative we study is "Secure Communities," a program designed to enable the federal government to check the immigration status of every person arrested for a crime by local police. Before this program, the government checked the immigration status of only a small fraction of arrestees. Since its launch, the program has led to over a quarter of a million detentions. We exploit the slow rollout of the program across more than 3,000 U.S. counties to obtain differences-in-differences estimates of the impact of Secure Communities on local crime rates. We also use rich data on the number of immigrants detained under the program in each county and month-data obtained from the federal government through extensive FOIA requests-to estimate the elasticity of crime with respect to incapacitated immigrants. Our results show that Secure Communities led to no meaningful reductions in the FBI index crime rate. Nor has it reduced rates of violent crime-homicide, rape, robbery, or aggravated assault. This evidence shows that the program has not served its central objective of making communities safer. Details: Chicago: University of Chicago School of Law; New York: New York University Law School, 2014. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Draft, August 21, 2014: Accessed September 15, 2014 at: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/does_immigration_enforcement_reduce_crime_082514.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/does_immigration_enforcement_reduce_crime_082514.pdf Shelf Number: 133328 Keywords: Crime PreventionImmigrants (U.S.)Immigrants and CrimeImmigrationImmigration EnforcementSecure CommunitiesUndocumented Citizens |
Author: U.S. Government Accountability Office Title: Alternatives to Detention: Improved Data Collection and Analyses Needed to Better Assess Program Effectiveness Summary: Aliens awaiting removal proceedings or found to be removable from the United States are detained in ICE custody or released into the community under one or more options, such as release on bond and under supervision of the ATD program. Within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ICE is responsible for overseeing aliens in detention and those released into the community. In 2004 ICE implemented the ATD program to be a cost-effective alternative to detaining aliens. ICE administers the program with contractor assistance using case management and electronic monitoring to ensure aliens comply with release conditions-including appearing at immigration court hearings and leaving the United States if they receive a final order of removal. The Joint Explanatory Statement to the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act mandated that GAO evaluate ICE's implementation of the ATD program. This report addresses (1) trends in ATD program participation from fiscal years 2011 through 2013 and the extent to which ICE provides oversight to help ensure cost-effective program implementation, and (2) the extent that ICE measured the performance of the ATD program for fiscal years 2011 through 2013. GAO analyzed ICE and ATD program data, reviewed ICE documentation, and interviewed ICE and ATD contractor officials. What GAO Recommends GAO recommends that ICE analyze data to monitor ERO field offices' implementation of guidance and require the collection of data on the Technology-only component. DHS concurred with the recommendations. Details: Washington, DC: GAO, 2014. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: GAO-15-26: Accessed November 25, 2014 at: http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/666911.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/666911.pdf Shelf Number: 134254 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationImmigrant Detention (U.S.)Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)Immigration EnforcementUndocumented Citizens |
Author: Papademetriou, Demetrios G. Title: Beyond Asylum: Rethinking Protection Policies to Meet Sharply Escalating Needs Summary: With more than half of all registered refugees displaced for at least five years and forced displacement at levels unseen since World War II, there is growing recognition that the global protection system is failing both those it was designed to protect and the communities that offer refuge. Responsibility for providing protection is falling extremely unevenly on countries and communities closest to the regions of crisis. This reality undermines overall public support for the refugee system in countries of first asylum. But publics in wealthy countries in Europe and elsewhere that seemingly have "gold-standard" protection systems are also experiencing increasing "protection fatigue." A new report from the Migration Policy Institute's Transatlantic Council on Migration discusses the growing strains on the protection system before proposing a series of goals that national governments and international actors should pursue to facilitate the development of an innovative, comprehensive protection system that better meets the needs of today's refugees and host communities alike. In Beyond Asylum: Rethinking Protection Policies to Meet Sharply Escalating Needs, Transatlantic Council Convenor and MPI President Emeritus Demetrios G. Papademetriou urges policymakers to respond proactively to instability and the inevitable displacement before it becomes unmanageable-as seen with the rising flows crossing the Mediterranean in search of refuge in Europe, in Southeast Asia's Bay of Bengal and Andaman Sea, and elsewhere. Investment in sustainable livelihoods and better living conditions for both refugees and host communities in the crisis region; wider legal channels for protection and alternative ways for refugees to submit claims (such as external processing); and the development of fairer, more effective asylum adjudication, reception and return policies are all necessary elements, Papademetriou suggests. "The scale of current protection demands has made the need for policy innovations clear, even to those outside the humanitarian community, and has created an ideal opportunity to experiment," Papademetriou writes. Among the recommendations, the report urges policymakers to move beyond the traditional care-and-maintenance model of protection by finding ways to empower refugees to gain access to secure living situations and the means to support themselves as quickly as possible. Policymakers "need to consider refugees not just as victims in need of shelter, but social and economic actors with a need for individual fulfillment and opportunities, and the potential to contribute to their host communities through their skills, international networks, access to unique streams of aid and resources, and purchase of local goods and services," Papademetriou writes. Details: Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2015. 19p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 4, 2015 at: http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/TCM-Protection-CouncilStatement.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/TCM-Protection-CouncilStatement.pdf Shelf Number: 135898 Keywords: Asylum SeekersImmigrantsMigration PolicyRefugeesUndocumented Citizens |
Author: Flynn, Matthew Title: Bureaucratic Capitalism and the Immigration Detention Complex Summary: The work of post-structuralist political philosopher Giorgio Agamben (1998,2005) has had a major influence on the study of immigration detention in Europe and elsewhere. In particular, his concepts homo sacer ("bare life") and "zones of exemption" depict the growth of immigration detention practices as an expression of sovereign power through inclusive exclusion. In other words, states demonstrate their power to confer rights upon their citizens by denying those rights to others. This paper argues that post-structuralist approaches to the study of immigration detention present a number of theoretical and conceptual problems. Post-structuralist analyses focusing on discourses divorced from actors present teleological problems in terms of theory. Additionally, poststructural accounts of detention centres using concepts such as homo sacer and Banoptican (see Bigo 2007) tend to conflate human rights and citizenship rights, which does not hold up empirically because many asylum seekers and irregular migrants still have access to legal redress. In contrast to post-structural accounts, the notion of "bureaucratic capitalism" developed by sociologist Gideon Sjoberg (1999) provides an analytical framework that is both critical and non-deterministic in explaining the motives of many actors involved in detention regimes. Specifically, immigration detention can be explained by employing conceptual frameworks used to assess the corporate-state nexus; human agency; rationalization processes like specialization and division of labour; hierarchy, responsibility, and blameability; and secrecy systems. Sjoberg's meso-level theory provides critical insights into detention regimes in the United States and Europe as well as the role of private- and public-sector interests seeking rents. Moreover, focusing on the organization of detention helps reveal the causes of human rights violations as well as their possible redress Details: Geneva, SWIT: Global Detention Project, 2015. 22p. Source: Internet Resource: Global Detention Project Working Paper No. 9: Accessed July 15, 2015 at: http://www.globaldetentionproject.org/fileadmin/publications/Matt_Flynn_GDP_Paper_2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: International URL: http://www.globaldetentionproject.org/fileadmin/publications/Matt_Flynn_GDP_Paper_2015.pdf Shelf Number: 136065 Keywords: Human RightsIllegal ImmigrantsImmigrant DetentionUndocumented Citizens |
Author: Rosenblum, Marc R. Title: An Analysis of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States by Country and Region of Birth Summary: Mexican and Central American immigrants, who have long histories of migration to the United States, represent 37 percent of the U.S. foreign-born population, yet are disproportionately represented (71 percent) among the total unauthorized immigrant population. Mexico alone accounts for more than half of the estimated 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States, with another 15 percent and 14 percent from Central America and Asia, respectively. This report describes trends in the origins of the unauthorized population since 1990, offering estimates for top states and counties of residence by country or region of origin. It also provides estimates for how many members of each origin group are potentially eligible for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, finding application rates vary significantly across national origins. The report also reviews how settlement patterns vary by origin among new and more established immigration destinations. During the 1990s, the unauthorized population rose substantially, doubling from 3.5 million to 7 million. It continued to increase during the 2000s, reaching a peak of 12.2 million in 2007, then fell to 11 million during and after the recession. While Mexicans comprised a majority of unauthorized immigrants throughout these years, between 2007 and 2013 the population declined by about 1 million. In contrast, unauthorized populations from Central America, Asia, and Africa grew rapidly after 2000-with the numbers from Central America and Asia tripling and from Africa doubling. Countries significantly represented in these increases include China, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guatemala, Honduras, India, and South Korea. Details: Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute, 2015. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 19, 2015 at: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/analysis-unauthorized-immigrants-united-states-country-and-region-birth Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/analysis-unauthorized-immigrants-united-states-country-and-region-birth Shelf Number: 136486 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrationImmigrantsImmigrationUndocumented Citizens |
Author: Collins, Jock Title: Immigrant Crime in Europe and Australia: Rational or Racialised Responses? Summary: In Australia and the European Union today there is a very negative immigration discourse linked to the (alleged) criminality of immigrant minorities - particularly those from Asia and the Middle East - and the existence of ethnic criminal gangs. The issue of immigrant crime - linked to the issue of undocumented migrants and refugees - is driving much of the political agenda in Australia and Europe. This paper first reviews the recent European and Australian experience of immigrant crime and the politicisation and racialisation of the immigrant crime issue. It then draws on the findings from a two-year research project into Youth, Ethnicity and Crime in Sydney - funded by the Australian Research Council, the Australian Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and 25 industry partners, including 10 local government authorities and 10 ethnic community organizations in Sydney - to explore the myths and realities of immigrant crime in Sydney, including gender dimensions. The paper then critically analyses media portrayals of such crime and investigates appropriate policy responses at federal, provincial and local government level. Finally, the implications of the immigrant crime debate for immigration and settlement policies in Australia and Europe are discussed. Details: Paper presented to conference entitled The Challenges of Immigration and Integration in the European Union and Australia, 18-20 February 2003, University of Sydney. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 21, 2015 at: https://digitalcollections.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/41423/3/collins_paper.pdf Year: 2003 Country: Australia URL: https://digitalcollections.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/41423/3/collins_paper.pdf Shelf Number: 136527 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigrantsImmigrants and CrimeUndocumented Citizens |
Author: Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) Title: Sanctuary Policies Across the U.S. Summary: Cooperation between federal, state, and local governments is the cornerstone of effective immigration enforcement. State and local law enforcement officers are often the last line of defense against criminal aliens, and are far more likely to encounter illegal aliens during routine job activities than are federal agents. As such, the ability of state and local law enforcement and other government officials to freely cooperate and communicate with federal immigration authorities is not just important - but essential - to the enforcement of our immigration laws. Nonetheless, law enforcement agencies, local governments, and even states across the country are proactively enacting policies and practices to restrict or all together prohibit cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Commonly referred to as "sanctuary policies," such ordinances, directives, and practices undermine enforcement of U.S. immigration law by impeding state and local officials, including law enforcement officers, from asking individuals about their immigration status, reporting them to the federal government, or otherwise cooperating with or assisting federal immigration officials. While many of these policies and practices are written, they may be unwritten as well, sometimes making them difficult to discover or verify. Most of the sanctuary policies and practices instituted since FAIR first issued its list of sanctuary jurisdictions in 2013 fall into the "anti-detainer" category. These generally refer to directives that inhibit or restrict the ability of state and local law enforcement to hold criminal aliens for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Some anti-detainer policies even go so far as to prohibit state and local law enforcement from simply notifying ICE that they are about to release a criminal alien back onto the streets or from otherwise assisting federal authorities. Sadly, most anti-detainer policies are put in place by the law enforcement agencies themselves, bullied by the illegal alien lobby into believing they must follow the open borders agenda or risk being sued. While some of the sanctuary policies noted in this report were enacted decades ago - such as the ones in New York City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco - the vast majority have been instituted since President Obama took office in 2009. Of the 300 jurisdictions cited in this report: 239 jurisdictions have sanctuary policies or practices instituted by law enforcement agencies; 23 jurisdictions have sanctuary resolutions; 15 jurisdictions have sanctuary laws or ordinances, including statewide laws in California, Connecticut, and Oregon; 5 jurisdictions have sanctuary executive orders; and 18 jurisdictions either have multiple forms of sanctuary policies or practices in place, or have a policy or practice that simply fit no other classification. Some of these policies or practices were very easy to discover and label. Others required a bit more digging to locate. As such, FAIR used a wide-variety of sources when compiling this list of jurisdictions and evidence. This included primary sources such as the actual resolutions, ordinances, and policy directives, as well as secondary sources such as the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Declined Detainer Outcome Report obtained by the Center for Immigration Studies, various academic or congressional reports, and even media coverage. FAIR has found that jurisdictions often justify their sanctuary policies by claiming that illegal aliens will be more likely to report crimes to law enforcement without fear of deportation. However, FAIR knows of no evidence demonstrating that sanctuary policies lead to increased crime reporting among illegal immigrant communities, and law enforcement officers already have the discretion to grant immunity to witnesses and victims of crime. Sanctuary jurisdictions also often lament that immigration is a "federal issue" and therefore they do not have a responsibility to cooperate with federal officials. This argument is belied by the fact that illegal immigration costs state and local governments roughly $84 billion annually - a significant majority of the estimated $113 billion annual price tag of illegal immigration on U.S. taxpayers. As such, the cost of illegal immigration in terms of government services, education, healthcare, crime, and impact on the labor market are far greater than any benefit that may accrue from a perceived increase in cooperation between illegal alien communities and law enforcement. Our comprehensive (but by no means exhaustive) list of sanctuary jurisdictions appears below. It includes jurisdictions with laws, resolutions, policies, or practices that obstruct cooperation with federal immigration authorities or assistance with federal immigration detainers. FAIR ceased conducting research activities for this report in November 2016; changes have already been made to the policies and practices in some jurisdictions, while additional sanctuary policies and practices have been instituted in others and will be added in the next edition. Indeed, dozens of city and county officials have doubled-down on their jurisdiction's sanctuary policy in the days and weeks following the 2016 election. Details: Washington, DC: FAIR, 2017. 61p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 26, 2018 at: http://www.fairus.org/sites/default/files/2017-08/Sanctuary_Policies_Across_America_Report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.fairus.org/sites/default/files/2017-08/Sanctuary_Policies_Across_America_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 149573 Keywords: Illegal ImmigrantsImmigration EnforcementImmigration PolicyImmigration ReformSanctuary CitiesUndocumented Citizens |