Immigration in US: Humanitarian, Security & Economic Concerns - Essay Sample

Introduction

Immigration has been a central issue in the political debate of the United States for many years. Immigration is a subject of great interest because its policy has to consider humanitarian, security, and economic concerns. For decades, Congress has not been able to agree on comprehensive immigration reforms (Vimo, 2019). Hence, some key policy decisions have often moved to the judiciary and the executive.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

The US has always been known for welcoming more immigrants than any other country in the world. For example, in 2018, it registered about 1.1 million legal immigrants, comprising of workers with special skills and individuals with close family members in the US (Vimo, 2019). However the American people are increasingly becoming discontented with the growing number of immigrants, whom they claim will displace them from their jobs, cause a reduction in wages, and lower the standard of living for the poor. They also claim that immigrants exploit the welfare state, inflate government deficit and debt, and compromise the security of the country by increasing crime rate and terrorism.

The Trump administration has taken several extraordinary measures to limit immigration. Such actions include building a wall in the US border with Mexico, deporting millions of illegal immigrants and their children, and tightening the requirements for granting green cards and citizenship (Crowe & Lucas-Vergona, 2007). The move has attracted as much support as criticism from Americans who remain sharply divided on immigration policy.

The Evolution of the Immigrant Rights Movements

More than 10 million undocumented immigrants in the US face oppression amounting to human rights violations (Cho, 2019). Undocumented immigrants cannot access public services, education, and labor protection. Their immigration status denies them mobility, condemning the immigrants to live in hiding in low-wage workplaces like restaurants, hotels, and farms where they are exploited and intimidated. Effectively, social movements have come up to protect immigrants from repressive immigration laws and discrimination. The movement also advocates for legal reform to enable undocumented immigrants to gain citizenship. Since 2004, this movement has increasingly been advocating for the rights of immigrants through social and legal help, as well as non-violent protests and mass actions.

According to Castaneda et al. (2019), The main players in the movement include faith-based organizations, small service organizations, national organizations (like the National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Countries, the National Council of La Raza, and the Fair Immigration Reform Movement), City and State-based advocacy organizations (like Pueblo Unidos of New Mexico, and Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles), labor federations and trade unions (like United Farm Workers, American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organization, and Change to Win).

Some of the notable actions taken by the immigrant rights movement include the 2004 Immigrant Worker Freedom Ride (IWFR) campaign which sought to jumpstart reform at the federal level (Castaneda et al., 2019). While IWFR did not bear any legislative fruits, it cemented the foundation for future mass actions. That was followed by nationwide marches and boycotts on 25th March and 1st May 2006, which involved millions of people (Castaneda et al., 2019). The Republican Party leadership in the House responded to the actions by abandoning the Sensenbrenner bill, which was more extreme and replacing with less repressive efforts. The next wave of immigrant rights protests came on 1st May 2007 (Castaneda et al., 2019). The organizations actively mobilized Latino voters to send the Republican Party out of power by voting Senator Barack Obama as president. According to Paret et al. (2020), the campaign was critical in making Florida, Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada swing states in the 2008 elections.

In addition, local groups have fought for legal reform to allow undocumented immigrants to attend school and college. They have also advocated for access to more social services and legislation to protect the victims from deportation. The immigrant rights movement has been instrumental in opposing efforts that promote the enforcement of retrogressive immigration laws.

Although immigration was not a dominant subject in the run-up to the 2008 presidential elections, the Latino population overwhelmingly voted for Obama, whose administration significantly relented in active enforcement of the radical immigration policies (Paret et al., 2020). The federal government greatly reduced workplace raids, though it did not intervene much against repressive enforcement of immigration legislation at the local level. It also failed to end the pressure on employers to dismiss and report undocumented workers.

The activities of the immigrant rights movement have intensified further under the current Trump administration, which has greatly favored the enforcement of tough immigration policies in the US. The movement is always organizing and lobbying through emails, letters, and calls to pressurize the Congress and the president to halt some immigration enforcement measures that violate basic human rights. There are also rallying calls to enact immigrant rights reform.

Federal Legislation on Immigration Since 2010

Since the House has remained divided over the issue of immigration for a long time, Congress has not been able to pass any legislation in the last decade. However, some immigration policies have been established through executive orders and Supreme Court rulings. The first immigration policy passed in the last 10 years is the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which President Obama signed in 2012 to temporarily shield unregistered immigrants brought to the US as children from deportation (History.com, 2019).

In November 2014, through an executive order, President Obama expanded the DACA program and established the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) (Cho, 2019). The new program was meant to enable unregistered immigrants with US-born children to seek temporary deportation relief and work permits. However, in December 2014, some 26 states challenged the executive order that created DACA and DAPA, claiming that the president did have the authority to change the policies (Cho, 2019). Effectively, both programs were temporarily put on hold in February 2015. The Supreme Court confirmed the initial injunction suspending the programs in June 2016 (History.com, 2019). The DACA and DAPA orders were never enforced until President Trump repelled them in June 2017.

Through executive orders, Trump then set up a new immigration policy known as "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States" in 2017 (History.com, 2019). The program banned immigration and travel from Venezuela, and North Korea as well as six countries with dominant Muslim populations - Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Libya, Iran, and Chad. The two travel restrictions were challenged in courts at both the federal and state level. The Supreme Court lifted the travel ban on Chad in April 2018 and upheld the immigration restrictions on the remaining seven nations (History.com, 2019).

The Current Political Landscape and Debates on Immigration

The House remains divided over whether the need to pursue comprehensive immigration reforms. On the one hand, the position of the democrats, who control the Congress, is that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency should be restructured, DACA-eligible immigrants should be given legal status, and the law should provide a pathway to citizenship. On the other hand, the Republicans, who are the majority in Senate want to abolish all laws creating a pathway to citizenship and increase arrest and deportation of undocumented immigrants.

The United States will be holding presidential elections in November this year, and immigration policy has emerged as a key issue in the contest. The frontrunners in the election are Joe Biden representing the Democratic Party and Donald Trump running on a Republican Party ticket. Each of these candidates, as well as withdrawal candidates, has proposed immigration policies that they want for the United States in their campaign websites.

Joe Biden pledges to pursue an immigration policy that is humane, secures the US border, strengthens its economy, and upholds its values. He states that everyone knows that the American immigration system is broken, yet there has been no political will to reform it (Ballotpedia, 2020). He believes that good immigration policies should not only protect the borders, but also enforce the rule of law without undermining the people's humanity, principles, and values. He adds that the answer to the current immigration standoff is not in forcefully separating children from their parents or putting fellow humans in cages. He prides himself in leading an endeavor to address the root causes of immigration that make people want to start a new life in the US through hook and crook when he was Obama's Vice President. Lastly, he describes legal immigration as a strength that has enabled the country to constantly reinvent and renew itself.

In his website, Trump claims that he tightened immigration policy to protect the people living in American and their jobs, and restored law and order to secure the American communities (Ballotpedia, 2020). Trump states that he urged Congress to end the visa lottery program, eliminate chain migration, close legal gaps that allow undocumented immigration, and fund construction of the Southern border wall. Trump prides himself in increasing the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests by 40 percent in his first year in office. He has also overseen the doubling of the number of counties taking part in the 287 (g) program, which authorizes local and state police to control immigration in their jurisdiction.

Sociological Theory Explaining the Power Difference

Based on the history of US immigration policy and reform in the last decade, there is no denying that some players have more power than others in this debate. One sociological theory that can be used to explain the power play evident in the immigration issue is the power elite theory. According to the theory, the most powerful people in the military, corporate and political sectors in the United States come together to form the power elite, who control the government, cultural, civic, social, educational, and financial institutions (Swanson, 2017). They make important decisions that influence the direction of the country based on the free market economic system (Swanson, 2017). It appears that the majority of the power elite hold Republican ideals and that is why the Republican Party has a dominant position in the immigration debate.

Uncertainty in Political and Legal Environments

The political and legal environments have demonstrated uncertainty in many issues related to immigration policies, and that further complicates the cause of immigration stakeholders. Democratic administrations have consistently shown support for the expansion of immigrant rights but subsequent Republican governments have shown a trend of undoing the progress made in this struggle. At the same time, having a consistently divided House has impaired countless attempts to change immigration laws. Sometimes, the courts have also been divided over this debate, making it difficult for stakeholders to challenge existing policies. For example, The Supreme Court upheld the preliminary injunction of the executive orders establishing DACA and DAPA based o...