287(g) programs have surged into the public consciousness in recent years. Now operating in 72 jurisdictions, the 287(g) program authorizes state and local law enforcement officers to screen people for immigration status, issue detainers to hold unauthorized immigrants on immigration violations, and begin the process of their removal from the United States.
In assessing the implementation, enforcement outcomes, costs, and community impacts of the 287(g) federal-state immigration enforcement program, the report finds that about half of 287(g) activity involves noncitizens arrested for misdemeanors and traffic offenses.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Alejandro Mayorkas details his agenda for his agency and discusses top priorities for USCIS.
This report provides an analytical framework for determining whether the 287(g) program is worth maintaining, and offers recommendations on how federal and local officials can shape the program to promote efficiency, accountability, and basic human rights, and to assist community leaders in monitoring the program.
A panel discussion exploring whether ICE is capable of meeting legal standards and manage its detention system with ICE's Dora Schriro, Detention Watch Network's Andrea Black, and MPI expert Donald Kerwin.
This report explores whether U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is capable of fully complying with the law and managing its sprawling detention system, and provides a roadmap for meeting the data needs essential for making humane, cost-effective, and legally sound decisions related to those in custody.
This report assesses the performance of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) over the course of the agency’s first six years, examines the effectiveness of the three core immigration agencies within DHS—U.S Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
This report provides a framework for assessing the legal validity of state legislative measures that address unauthorized immigration. To determine their validity, authors seek to establish whether Congress has preempted the law, and if not, whether these local laws exceed the bounds of constitutional authority by conflicting or interfering with existing federal regulatory regimes.