Amid growing public concern over illegal immigration, state and local governments in the United States increasingly have waded into an immigration enforcement arena that historically was viewed as the preserve of the federal government—enacting legislation and ordinances seeking to reduce illegal immigration and signing on to federal-state law enforcement partnerships such as the 287(g) initiative. The research here traces the rise of state and local activity in the post-9/11 environment.
After years of gridlock, increasing pressure from immigrant advocates, and several delays in 2014, President Obama announced sweeping executive actions to provide deportation relief to as many as 5.2 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States. The plan sparked a political firestorm among Republicans who vowed to use all tools at their disposal to block the actions, ensuring that immigration will continue to be a flashpoint for the remainder of the president's term.
When Congress returns from recess in September, lawmakers will need to pick up where they left off on approving an emergency spending bill to address unaccompanied migrant children at the border. This article previews upcoming battles in Congress and analyzes how the recent border crisis is changing the broader immigration debate in the United States.
This article dissects the current patchwork of overlapping and potentially conflicting authorities for immigration enforcement and policymaking in the United States, based on unique, country-wide surveys and city case studies.
Nearly 200 localities in the United States have seriously considered policies intended to restrict immigration or its impact. Kevin O'Neil of Princeton University analyzes the types of laws local governments pursue and the reasons they take action.
In no state is the immigration debate more polarized than in Arizona. Malia Politzer examines the proimmigrant and border watch groups active in the state and how they seek to influence policy.
On January 25, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order laying out a series of border enforcement mandates, including constructing a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and expanding the use of expedited removal. This brief summarizes and analyzes key provisions of the executive order and accompanying Department of Homeland Security implementation guidance, comparing them to earlier policy and practice.
Beyond representing first steps on key campaign promises, President Trump's executive orders on immigration mandate sweeping data collection and reporting in ways that seek to underscore societal and economic costs with no countervailing attention to positive effects from immigration. This article explores the news-making machinery embedded in the orders and how the reporting requirements might help further the administration's agenda.
This brief outlines key provisions in an executive order signed by President Trump that makes sweeping changes to immigration enforcement in the U.S. interior, including significantly broadening the categories of unauthorized immigrants who are priorities for removal. The brief examines the executive order and accompanying Department of Homeland Security guidance, comparing them to prior policy and practice.
President Obama faced criticism over his administration's handling of immigration enforcement from both the left and the right, labeled "deporter in chief" even as he was also accused of lax enforcement. A closer examination of his administration's record paints a more nuanced picture. This article explores how immigration enforcement practices shifted to achieve two key goals over the course of the Obama era.
There has been much interest—and confusion—regarding the number of unauthorized immigrants who could be deported because of criminal records under the Trump administration. This commentary examines what we know about the number of unauthorized immigrants with a criminal conviction and traces how the U.S. immigration enforcement system has already been recalibrated to identify and remove this population.
Over the past decade, state and local policymakers have increasingly stepped into the void left by Washington over legislative reform of the immigration system and have enacted their own policies, particularly in regard to illegal immigration. This article explores this trend of increased activism and examines whether restrictive state immigration laws have had an effect on the size of immigrant populations at the state level.
The 13th annual Immigration Law & Policy Conference offered policy and legal analysis on key immigration topics, including: the election and the future of immigration policy; refugee resettlement in the United States; immigration detention and enforcement; and the impacts of the Supreme Court opinion in the important U.S. vs Texas case
Growing up with unauthorized immigrant parents puts children—nearly 80 percent of whom were born in the United States—at a disadvantage, with lower preschool enrollment, reduced socioeconomic progress, and higher rates of linguistic isolation and poverty. This fact sheet examines the number, characteristics, and socioeconomic status of children, both U.S.-citizen and noncitizen, who have unauthorized immigrant parents.
Unauthorized Immigrants with Criminal Convictions: Who Might Be a Priority for Removal?