Migration Policy Institute - Commentary
RSS - Commentary
Subscribe to our Commentary RSS feed using your favorite RSS reader: Subscribe
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.
Initial reaction to the British government's offer regarding the post-Brexit treatment of EU nationals resident in the United Kingdom was sharply divergent, ranging from constructive to catastrophic. Examining the deal at a slightly longer remove, the proposal in many ways represents a thoughtful piece of immigration policy—albeit with some glaring holes and vague elements, as this commentary explores.
Legal analysis of the Supreme Court’s opinion allowing aspects of a controversial Trump administration executive order to take effect has largely focused on the travel ban on certain nationals from six predominantly Muslim countries. Less noticed was the justices' views with regards to the temporary suspension of the refugee resettlement program. This commentary explores the ruling's possible consequences on refugees.
A recent MPI study reveals that 48 percent of recent immigrants to the United States were college graduates, a sharp increase over earlier periods. How can the United States better leverage this brain gain? This commentary outlines some policies that could allow the United States to more fully utilize the professional and academic credentials that highly skilled immigrants have, for their benefit and that of the U.S. economy.
As the process of removing the United Kingdom from the European Union gets underway, the rights of the 1.2 million UK citizens or “Brexpats” who have chosen to live in one of the 27 other EU countries have been largely overshadowed. This MPI Europe commentary explores some of the many complexities ahead in negotiating rights for these individuals in a post-Brexit world.
The failure of Geert Wilders’ right-wing, anti-Islam Freedom Party (PVV) to become the top vote-getter in the Dutch parliamentary elections is being hailed as proof of the limits of anti-Muslim rhetoric and even the “waning” of the appeal of right-wing populism. But as this commentary explores, a closer reading leads one to a more nuanced interpretation of the results and the recognition that Wilders will remain a major force.
While the chaos of 2015 has abated, the conditions that fuelled huge spontaneous flows of asylum seekers and migrants to Europe have not changed. Europe faces a fundamental governance test that is undermining the legitimacy of both national and European institutions and, more directly, the integrity of management structures of Member States most affected by spontaneous migration. This commentary by Demetrios Papademetriou explores the challenges and way forward.
The selection of Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary and President Trump’s immigration enforcement-focused executive orders have left many parents and educators wondering how the new administration’s policies will affect students from immigrant families and the schools that serve them. The simple answer, as this commentary explores, is: It will depend on the actions of state and local policymakers where those students live.
The revised travel ban executive order signed by President Trump on March 6, 2017 significantly narrows an earlier order that provoked chaos at U.S. airports and sparked many legal challenges. Still, as with the earlier version, it represents a sharp cut in the refugee resettlement program and restricts nationals from six majority-Muslim countries from newly entering the United States, as this commentary explores.