Migration Policy Institute - Commentary
RSS - Commentary
Subscribe to our Commentary RSS feed using your favorite RSS reader: Subscribe
The United Nations has marked an important milestone: its members have agreed on the text of a wide-reaching agreement to cooperate on migration. The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration is a noteworthy step towards minimizing the chaos of unplanned large-scale movements and maximizing the benefits of migration, but as this commentary explains, its ultimate effectiveness will depend on the national actions it inspires.
European leaders have settled on a recurring proposition to address the ongoing political crisis on migration: the creation of asylum processing centers beyond EU borders. The plans championed by various EU leaders are diverse, the details fuzzy. What they have in common is a near-universal focus on shifting responsibility for dealing with refugees and migrants upstream, as this commentary examines.
Even as some pundits assess President Trump's temporary end to family separation as a defeat, the deeper reality is being lost: The administration’s plan to detain all asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border, including families, is now on its way to completion. The “catch-and-release” that Donald Trump rails against is, at least in part, effectively over for now, though the price tag is a long way from being tallied, as this commentary explains.
In exchange for resolving the status of DREAMers, the White House and its congressional allies are demanding billions of dollars for a border wall and additional enforcement, sharp limits on asylum, cuts to legal immigration, and more. But what would the two bills expected to be voted on by the House do in terms of extending temporary or permanent status to DREAMers? This commentary offers estimates.
Amid significant tensions over migration that could fracture Chancellor Angela Merkel's governing coalition, a new "migration master plan" set to be unveiled by Interior Minister Horst Seehofer reportedly involves turning asylum seekers back at German borders and refusing them entry. This commentary explores the potential implications of the proposal, which has prompted concern about the ramifications for the Common European Asylum System.
The House is set to vote on two bills that would largely dismantle the U.S. asylum system at the southern border by significantly narrowing grounds to apply for asylum, eliminating protections for the vast majority of unaccompanied minors, and unilaterally declaring Mexico a safe third country. The result would be a sharp reduction in the number of people permitted to seek humanitarian protection, as this commentary explains.
Monthly apprehension statistics at the Southwest border have become a preoccupation for the Trump administration, which compares the 2018 numbers to 2017 and declares a crisis. Yet it was 2017, when the "Trump effect" temporarily paused illegal crossings, that was the outlier. Recent trends have reverted to the pattern seen in 2016, a result notable at a time of very low U.S. unemployment, as this commentary explores.
The European Commission has proposed an 89.5 billion-euro fund to combat irregular migration by investing heavily in countries outside the European Union. This commentary argues the ultimate aims of the policy remain obscure, and with some of the money to be drawn from development aid funds is certain to raise tensions between institutions with conflicting goals and mandates.
The EU-Turkey deal has been credited with helping to end the migration crisis of 2015-16, and after two years in force it has fostered a myth that such deals are cure-alls. They are not, as this MPI Europe commentary explores. Recent EU responses place great emphasis on transit routes to Europe. But what if the next major event is a different kind of shock altogether?
Even as the 1.8 million number swirls in the discussion of how many DREAMers would be placed on a path to citizenship, proposals debated in the Senate in February 2018 would have resulted in the legalization of smaller numbers, as this commentary explains. It offers estimates of potential beneficiaries of several Senate proposals, including one backed by the White House, and analysis of key criteria.
On paper, the Diversity Visa Program is not set up to bring in the highly skilled; applicants need only a high school diploma (or equivalent) or two years of mid-level work experience. Yet as this commentary explains, the green-card lottery has become a channel for entry of the highly skilled—with half of recipients coming to the United States in recent years having a college degree.
The White House immigration plan offered as a solution to resolve the fate of DREAMers seeks legal immigration cuts unlike any seen since 1924. In addition to a decrease of up to 40 percent in family-sponsored immigration, the proposal demands vast increases in enforcement and a retrenchment in protections for those seeking humanitarian relief. In exchange, one-sixth of the unauthorized population could gain legal status.
European policymakers are fixated on reform of the Dublin Regulation, the contentious rules that carve up responsibility for asylum claims between EU states. They see it not only as a long-term prophylactic against future fluctuations in irregular migration, but as a marker of the success or failure of solidarity in Europe overall. Yet rather than doggedly working to salvage Dublin, policymakers need to stop and consider why they regard it as so integral to European cooperation, as this commentary explores.
The debate over the future of DACA participants and the passage of legislation to legalize them and a broader cohort of DREAMers features a number of arguments pro and con. Opposition centers in part on the premise of widespread labor market competition between DREAMers and the U.S. born, particularly minorities. But as as this commentary explains, analysis shows that the case is a weak one.
Amid growing calls for Congress to pass DREAM Act-type legislation, critics are arguing that legalization would spur vast new "chain migration" because DREAMers could eventually sponsor their relatives for green cards. MPI estimates the numbers who could receive legal permanent residence as a result of sponsorship by DREAMers would be far lower, for a range of reasons explained in this commentary.
The Trump administration’s decision to set the refugee ceiling at 45,000 for fiscal 2018 marks the lowest level since the refugee resettlement program was created in 1980. At a time of record humanitarian pressures, with more than 22.5 million refugees worldwide, the United States appears to be abandoning its leadership role and other traditional resettlement countries are shouldering a bigger load, as this commentary explores.
No enterprise in the United States could survive if it only counted the costs of doing business and ignored the benefits side of the ledger. But that is exactly how some Trump administration officials are evaluating the refugee resettlement program, rejecting a well-researched Department of Health and Human Services report that finds refugees brought in $63 billion more revenue to governments than they cost over a ten-year period, as this commentary notes.
By winding down DACA over six months, President Trump may have addressed a short-term political dilemma. But this action ensures debate will rage on in search of a lasting solution, as many in Congress and beyond recognize the loss of work authorization and deportation relief will affect not only DACA recipients and their families, but also employers, universities, and communities alike, as this commentary explores.
In this personal tribute, MPI Senior Fellow Doris Meissner honors Juan Osuna, who died in August 2017 after his recent retirement as Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, the nation's immigration court system. "As we at MPI ... contemplate work without his store of knowledge and fundamental human decency readily at hand, we mourn that his was a life cut too short, just as we honor him for a life well lived."
The RAISE Act endorsed by President Trump would have dramatic effects on family-based immigration to the United States, with disproportionate effects for immigrants from several countries in particular. While much focus has been given to the sponsors' pledge of "merit-based" immigration, the effects on the U.S. employment-based immigration system would be more modest in terms of outcomes, as this commentary explores.