This discussion covers some of the most difficult issues that must be addressed if the United States is to reform its immigration system in ways that work not only for today’s reality but tomorrow’s future.
This brief demystifies the technical meaning of going to the “back of the line”—a phrase adopted by lawmakers to convey the intent to grant legal status to unauthorized immigrants only after existing backlogs have been cleared—by explaining what “the line” refers to, who is in it, and what it means to be at the back of it.
This report examines Canada’s striking openness and optimism towards immigration and multiculturalism. Juxtaposing the widespread support of immigration among Canadian citizens with growing anti-immigrant sentiment and opposition to multicultural policies across Europe and the United States, the author seeks to uncover the reasons behind this Canadian “exceptionalism.”
This final report summarizes and reflects upon the key findings of the Improving EU and U.S. Immigration Systems: Learning from Experience comparative research project undertaken by MPI and the European University Institute through a grant from the European Commission.
While aspects of the U.S. immigration system facilitate newcomers’ contributions to economic growth and competitiveness, others undermine them. Reforms are needed to enhance the job-creating power of U.S. employers and strengthen the system’s ability to select effectively from the large pool of foreign workers.
Two competing models for selecting economic-stream immigrants are now prevalent in advanced industrialized economies: points-based and employer-led selection. Increasingly, however, hybrid selection systems are being created, implementing best practices from each selection process.
Drawing on experiences from Asia, Europe, North America, and the Pacific region, this report presents eight strategies that represent best practices developed by immigrant-receiving countries to increase the economic contributions of immigration.
Migrant-sending and migrant-receiving countries rarely collaborate on migration issues because the structure of global migration systems ensures they often disagree about core policy issues. This report shows that migration collaboration makes sense when states share common goals they cannot achieve on their own.