|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Illegal immigration to the United States refers to the act of moving to or settling in the United States temporarily or permanently in violation of U.S. immigration and nationality law. Immigration becomes illegal when immigrants either enter the country without authorization from the US Government, or having entered the US with authorization, either overstay their visa or violate its terms. The Immigration and Nationality Act governs immigration law. An illegal alien is a common term for humans who are not citizens but who remain in the country with the intent to reside here indefinitely. Tourists who are noncitizens are legally aliens due to their subjective intent to return to their own country; they are not illegal aliens. The presence in the United States plus the intent to reside here indefinitely makes the person a resident for purposes of estate taxes so that illegal aliens are subject to the estate tax on all their propoerty in all parts of the world if they die even though they may be deported. On the other hand, tourists who die while in the United States are not residents and not illegal aliens. Their property outside of the USA is not subject to the US estate tax.
DemographyThe population of the illegal immigrant population in the United States is hard to ascertain because of difficulties in unambiguously surveying this population, although according to NPR, "Demographer Jeff Passell at the Pew Hispanic Center says illegal immigrants are surprisingly forthcoming when interviewed anonymously."[8] Population SizeEstimates based on Census data, National surveys, administrative data and other sources indicate that the current [2/2007] illegal population is between 12 million and 20 million.[1]. Origin
According to a Pew Hispanic Center report, Mexicans make up about 57 percent of the illegal immigrants with another 24 percent coming from Central American and South American countries, approximately 9 percent from Asia, 6 percent from Europe and Canada, with the remaining 4 percent from the rest of the world.[2] Education
EmploymentEmployment compared to U.S. non-high school graduates, the closest comparable job market for most illegal immigrants. Material from "Estimates of the Size and Characteristics of the Undocumented Population", Jeffrey S. Passel, Pew Hispanic Center; and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Means of violationPeople become illegal immigrants in one of three ways: by entering the country by crossing the border without authorization or inspection, staying beyond the authorized period after their legal entry, and by violating the terms of their legal entry.[9] Border crossingImage:ElPaso-Juarez-EO.JPG El Paso (top) and Ciudad Juárez (bottom) seen from earth orbit; the Rio Grande is the thin line separating the two cities through the middle of the photograph. The United States Government Accountability Office estimates that “between 400,000 and 700,000 unauthorized migrants have entered the United States each year since 1992.” A substantial portion did so by crossing either the United States–Mexico border or the United States-Canada border.[4] According to the Pew Hispanic Center somewhat more than half of the unauthorized migrant population entered the country illegally rather than overstay their visas, where "Some evaded customs and immigration inspectors at ports of entry by hiding in vehicles such as cargo trucks. Others tracked through the Arizona desert, waded or swam across the Rio Grande or American Canal in California or otherwise eluded the U.S. Border patrol which has jurisdiction over all the land areas away from the ports of entry on the borders with Mexico and Canada."[5] Border Patrol activity on the United States-Mexico border is concentrated around big border cities such as San Diego and El Paso, which have extensive border fencing and enhanced border patrols. Stricter enforcement of the border in cities has failed to significantly curb illegal immigration; instead pushing the flow into more remote regions and increasing the cost to taxpayers of each arrest from $300 in 1992 to $1700 in 2002. The cost to the illegal immigrants has also increased significantly too as they now routinely hire coyotes to help them get across.[6] Despite the relative ineffectiveness of only partially fencing the border, no city with good fences and enforcement wants to return to the free for all immigration that preceded the fencing and enhanced enforcement.[citation needed] The unfenced rural mountainous and desert border between Arizona and Mexico has become a major entrance area for illegal immigration to the United States, due in part to the increased difficulty of crossing illegally in California.[7] Each year there are several hundred immigrant deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border. The number of deaths has been steadily increasing since the middle 1990s with exposure (including heat stroke, dehydration, and hypothermia) a leading cause.[8] The tightening of border enforcement has disrupted the "traditional" circular movement of many migrant workers from Mexico by increasing the costs and risks of crossing the border, thereby reducing their rate of return migration to Mexico. The difficulty and expense of the journey has prompted many migrant workers to stay in the United States longer or indefinitely.[9] The percentage of illegal immigrants who used to routinely return home and now don't is unknown.[citation needed] OverstaysA visa overstayer is someone who has entered the United States with authorization from the Government and then illegally overstayed his or her visa. Or they have entered US using a Border Crossing Card (BCC)[10] and then violated the restrictions imposed upon card holders. Visa overstayers tend to be somewhat more educated and be better off financially than those who crossed the border illegally.[11] To help track visa overstayers the new US-VISIT program collects and retains biographic, travel, and biometric information, such as photographs and fingerprints, of foreign nationals seeking entry into the United States. It also requires electronic readable passports containing this information. According to Secretary Michael Chertoff,[10] the single biggest handicap to this system is its lacks of facilities to routinely monitor and document who goes over the land borders into Canada and Mexico from the United States.[citation needed] The number of overstayers varies considerably from country to country depending on the location of the country, the cultural, political, amount of civil strife, social and economic conditions in a given country in a given time. The Pew Hispanic Center calculated that 1.9% of all nonimmigrant arrivals between 1998 and 2004 resulted in overstays, with a proportion varying widely by country of origin. The calculated share of Mexican legal visitors who overstay is lower (1.7%) than for Central American (3.2%) or South American (2.4%) nationalities, which the center explained was " because it easier for Mexicans to make illegal entries and harder for them to get visitor visas." [11] A 1995 U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) report gives estimates for all countries based on data from 1990-91 showing that Haiti, China, India, Korea, and the Philippines (plus others) had overstay violation rates as high as 8% or higher.[citation needed][12] In general the poorer the country they came from the more likely the foreign visitor was to violate their visa. Terms of entryAnother way people become illegal immigrants is by violating the terms of their legal entry; for example, tourists may become illegal immigrants by taking jobs in the United States.[12] Technically speaking, however, such a person, although out of status, does not become an illegal immigrant until either the expiration of the term of their original legal entry or formally ruled by DHS to have violated their status, whichever comes first. The act of accepting unauthorized employment may be unlawful, and subject the former tourist to deportation, but their presence in the country does not itself become unlawful until either a formal ruling to that effect is made, or the original term of admission expires. Thus, a tourist who accepts unauthorized employment, but who voluntarily leaves the USA before the original term of admission expires and before legal proceedings are initiated, may reapply to enter the USA without triggering any of the statutory bars that ordinarily apply to illegal immigrants. Readmission, however, may be denied at the discretion of consular or border officials if it is felt the person is likely to again violate their status in the USA. One common means of violating status (terms of entry) was coming to the U.S. on a student visa and not going to school or not leaving the country after finishing school.[citation needed] Technically speaking, this was a status violation, not an overstay, because foreign students were typically admitted for "duration of status" rather than until a fixed expiration date. The lack of a fixed expiration date coupled with a lack of knowledge of the changing academic status of purported foreign students meant that it was very difficult for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to track status violations by foreign students. The number of foreign students in the United States is over 600,000. However, this practice has been somewhat curtailed with the introduction of SEVIS, whereby the universities electronically report any no-shows and irregularities to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The lack of follow-up by a severely under-manned ICE [13] severely hampers the effectiveness of these reports.[citation needed] Causes of Illegal MigrationSee also causes for illegal immigration. Illegal Mexican immigrants traditionally have been portrayed as job seekers without good paying job options in their own country. Of Mexican immigrants surveyed who had been in the United States for two years, only 5 percent said they were unemployed before venturing north of the border.[13] By contrast those who had been within the US for over ten years, the figures jump to over 15%. The figures include only those who were actively seeking employment in Mexico. It excludes housewives, students, retirees, and those who for other reasons were not actively seeking employment. The figures are not adjusted to account for those who were underemployed[14] and researchers such as Fleck and Sorrentino (1994) argue that the lack of an adequate social safety net in Mexico has compelled many of the underemployed to take marginal jobs. Most illegal immigrants have some options in their own country but like the perceived options and opportunities better in the U.S. enough to put up with the large expense, often unpleasant journey, inconvenience and danger of illegally immigrating. ImpactEconomicPaul Samuelson, a Nobel-prize-winning economist from MIT, asserts that there is no unitary, singular effect, good or bad, that arises from illegal immigration, but instead a variety of effects on Americans depending on their economic class. Samuelson posits that wealthier Americans tend to benefit from the illegal influx, while poorer Americans tend to suffer.[15] Professor of Law Francine Lipman writes in a 2006 paper in the peer-reviewed journal Tax Lawyer of the American Bar Association Section of Taxation that the belief that undocumented migrants are exploiting the US economy and that they cost more in services than they contribute to the economy is "undeniable false". Lipman asserts that "undocumented immigrants actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services" and "contribute to the U.S. economy through their investments and consumption of goods and services; filling of millions of essential worker positions resulting in subsidiary job creation, increased productivity and lower costs of goods and services; and unrequited contributions to Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance programs."[16] One of the largest drivers of immigration both legal and illegal is economic supply and demand for labor and the natural human desire of people to participate in the economy and in so doing better their economic situation. Labor is a mobile economic factor of production. Libertarians believe that restricting free migration limits the free market for labor.[14][15] Research by George Borjas, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University, shows that illegal aliens increasing the supply of low skilled labor had a long-term reduction of wages among American poor citizens during the 1980s and 1990s by 4.8% [16] and, according to an op-ed by him in the New York Times, their wages will reduce much further if border security is reduced[17]. The supply of illegal alien labor has disproportionately affected certain groups of American citizens such as black and Hispanic poor with whom they compete for jobs.[17] A California study, "California’s Undocumented Latino Immigrants: A Report on Access to Health Care Services", page 38, [18] found about 90% of illegal immigrants in California do not have non-government medical insurance. An article by medical lawyer Madeleine Pelner in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons concluded that the burden of illegal immigrants on the health care system in the US has forced many hospitals to close due to unpaid bills and the unfunded mandate of EMTALA. Between 1993 and 2003, 60 hospitals in California alone were forced to close, and many others had to reduce staff or implement other procedures which reduced the level of service they could provide. The article attributes these closings mainly to illegal immigration. [19] However, Ernesto Zedillo, former President of Mexico and current Director of the Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, asserts that illegal immigrants are only a drain on government services when they are incapable of paying taxes; and that this incapacity is the result of restrictive federal policies that require proof of citizenship. He further argues that the US economy has "crucial" need for migrant workers, and that the current debate must acknowledge this rather than just focus on enforcement.[18] In 2003, another former President of Mexico, Vicente Fox stated that remittances of Mexican nationals in the United States, both legal and illegal, totaled $12 billion, and were the largest source of foreign income for Mexico. [20]. In 2005, the remittances from Mexican nationals worldwide was $18.1 billion[21]. CrimeAccording to a 1997 report by the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, "Through other violations of our immigration laws, Mexican drug cartels are able to extend their command and control into the United States. Drug smuggling fosters, subsidizes, and is dependent upon continued illegal immigration and alien smuggling."[19] Another large scale multi-million dollar criminal operation connected to illegal immigration is identity theft. [22] The Center of Immigration Studies (CIS) has stated that many violent crimes in the United States are committed by illegal immigrants.[23]. Because of the immigration status of the criminals, law enforcement officials are often unable to accurately track and find many of them as they retreat back over the border where they are often untraceable and/or not extraditable. A study by Dr. Deborah Schurman-Kauflin, director of the Violent Crimes Institute in Atlanta, Georgia, estimates that approximately one million sex crimes were committed by illegal immigrants in the period between 1999 and 2006. Of these, 70% of the victims were legal US residents. [24] In contrast to these studies, Robert Sampson, Professor in Social Sciences at Harvard University, speculates in Harvard Magazine in 2006 that being in the country illegally gives illegal aliens an "extra incentive to keep a clean record and not commit crimes, in order to avoid deportation".[20] TerrorismMohamed Atta al-Sayed and two of his co-conspirators had expired visas when they executed the September 11, 2001 attacks. All of the attackers had U.S. government issued documents and two of them were erroneously granted visa extensions after their deaths. The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States found that the government inadequately tracked those with expired tourist or student visas. Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, a think-tank that promotes stricter immigration standards and enforcement, testified in a hearing before the House of Representatives that"out of the 48 al-Qaeda operatives who committed crimes here between 1993 and 2001, 12 of them were illegal aliens when they committed their crimes, 7 of them were visa overstayers, including 2 of the conspirators in the first World Trade Center attack, one of the figures from the New York subway bomb plot, and 4 of the 9/11 terrorists. In fact, even a couple other terrorists who were not illegal when they committed their crimes had been visa overstayers earlier and had either applied for asylum or finagled a fake marriage to launder their status." [25]According to statements made by Attorney General John Ashcroft, all of the 9/11 hijackers came directly to the United States rather than across any of the borders[26], and this is also supported by the 9/11 Commission Report[27]. Vice Chair Lee Hamilton and Commissioner Slade Gorton of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States has stated that of the nineteen hijackers of the September 11, 2001 attacks, "Two hijackers could have been denied admission at the port on entry based on violations of immigration rules governing terms of admission. Three hijackers violated the immigration laws after entry, one by failing to enroll in school as declared, and two by overstays of their terms of admission."[28] Six months after the attack, their flight schools received posthumous visa approval letters from the INS for two of the hijackers, which made it clear that actual approval of the visas took place before the September 11 attacks [29]. Community Health"Legal immigrants over the age of 15 must have a chest x-ray upon entry to check for tuberculosis (drug resistant TB is incurably fatal and highly contagious)".[21][22] Illegal aliens are not screened in this manner. About two-thirds all legal immigrants "adjust status" to their green card after living for some time in the USA [23]. According to Dr. Lee Reichman, "Unless Americans are willing to adopt suffocatingly draconian immigration policies, the likelihood is that with globalization TB will again become epidemic here, in the same way that HIV moved from Africa to take root throughout the world. Suffering does not localize. When we engage with the world, we engage, inescapably and absolutely, with the world's infections. And the most devastating infection in the world is not Ebola or Lyme disease, West Nile virus or even HIV, but tuberculosis."[24] Dr. Madelein Cosman concurs, but points out that other diseases are also an issue, "many illegal aliens harbor fatal diseases that American medicine fought and vanquished long ago, such as drug-resistant tuberculosis, malaria, leprosy, plague, polio, dengue fever, and Chagas disease,"[25] EmploymentThe United States has laws requiring workers to have proper documentation, often intended to prevent the employment of illegal immigrants. To lawfully work within the US, individuals must have a valid Social Security Number and, if they are not citizens, authorization to work from the Department of Homeland Security. Undocumented workers engage in work without government authorization. Basic Pilot ProgramThe Department of Homeland Security maintains the Basic Pilot Program; a joint program between the DHS and the Social Security Administration that employers can use to check the work eligibility of newly hired workers. The program involves verification checks of names and social security numbers against the SSA and DHS databases. It is designed to screen for fake names and fake SS numbers, or names and numbers that do not match. It does not check as to whether legitimate names and numbers are being used by more than one person at one time, or in multiple locations. This information is known by the IRS but is not widely shared for "privacy reasons". Proposed legislation to fix these limitations have gone no where in Congress. Participation in the Basic Pilot Program is voluntary, and is free to participating employers. Corporate violationsSome major companies have been accused of hiring undocumented workers:
Immigration enforcementThe U.S. Customs and Border Protection is responsible for apprehending individuals attempting to enter the United States illegally. The United States Border Patrol is its mobile uniformed law enforcement arm, responsible for deterrence, detection and apprehension of immigrants who enter the United States without authorization from the government and outside the designated ports of entry. Police involvementThe higher crime rates associated with the cross border traffic has led to extensive efforts on the part of individual sheriffs and communities trying to prevent further damage to their property and communities. [30] [31] [32] However, federal judges have ruled that control of illegal immigration is the exclusive domain of the federal government and have prohibited local communities and states from attempting to enforce ordinances intended to control illegal immigration[33]. Militarization of the borderThe Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits direct participation of Department of Defense personnel in civilian law enforcement activities, such as search, seizure, and arrests.[29] Major Craig T. Trebilock, a member of the Judge Advocate General's Corps in the U.S. Army Reserve stated in an article on the use of military forces in the battle against terrorism, "The Posse Comitatus Act was passed to remove the Army from civilian law enforcement and to return it to its role of defending the borders of the United States."[34] In 1995 Congress considered an excemption from the Posse Comitatus Act authorizing the Secretary of Defense to detail members of the Armed Forces to enforce the immigration and customs laws in border areas.[35] In 1997, Marines shot and killed 18 year old US citizen Esequiel Hernandez Jr[36] while on a mission to interdict smuggling and illegal immigration in the remote Southwest. The soldiers observed the goat herder from concealment for 20 minutes maintaining radio contact with their unit. But at one point, this young man (who the Pentagon says previously had fired shots in the vicinity of Border Patrol agents) raised his rifle and fired shots in the direction of the concealed soldiers. After firing two shots, this young man was, in turn, shot and killed. In reference to the incident, military lawyer Craig T. Trebilock argues that "the fact that armed military troops were placed in a position with the mere possibility that they would have to use force to subdue civilian criminal activity reflects a significant policy shift by the executive branch away from the posse comitatus doctrine."[37] The killing of Hernandez led to a congressional review[38] and an end to a 9 year old policy of the military aiding the Border Patrol[39]. In May 2006, President George W. Bush announced plans to use the National Guard to strengthen enforcement of the US-Mexico Border from illegal immigrants[40], emphasizing that Guard units "will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities."[41] Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez said in an interview with a Mexico City radio station, "If we see the National Guard starting to directly participate in detaining people ... we would immediately start filing lawsuits through our consulates,"[30] ACLU called on the President not to deploy military troops to deter immigrants, and stated that a "deployment of National Guard troops violates the spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act"[42]. According to the State of the Union Address in January 2007[43], more than 6000 National Guard members have been sent to the US-Mexico border to supplement the Border Patrol[44], costing in excess of $750 million [45]. Increasing border securityDepartment of Homeland Security officials have stated that "...illegal immigration threatens our communities and our national security."[46] In fact, one of the main points of the illegal immigration controversy involves an increasing number of U.S. citizens calling for increased border security (with the main idea being to reduce illegal immigration). Some critics of border security suggest that their opponents are ignoring larger [insolvable] issues of wealth disparity, flaws in the immigration process, or other systematic issues which may have given rise to such a large influx of illegal immigrants, instead offering a band-aid solution. In late 2006, the US Congress passed the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which could lead to the construction of about 700 additional miles (1125 km) of the US-Mexico barrier. CriticsThe Cato Institute is among the critics who argue that increasing border security is counterproductive. The institute argues that increasing border security reduces the proportion of illegal immigrants caught at the border and increases the length of time illegal immigrants remain in the country. Cato claims that the only significant change on illegal immigrants has been in length of stay due to the cost of returning. The probability of returning within twelve months has gone from around 45% in 1980 to between 25 and 30% from 1998-2002. Also, the average trip duration has gone from 1.7 years to 3.5 years. According to the Cato Institute, the only important change in security has been one of cost. The Border Patrol's budget has gone from $151 million in 1986 to $1.6 billion in 2002. This has caused the cost of aprehending an illegal immigrant to go from around $100 per arrest before 1986 to around $1700 in 2002.[31]. Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, argues that "[illegal immigrants] are going to get here as long as they have economic incentives to come [...] The only real way to get control is to recognize the reality of our economic needs for labor." Jacoby further asserts that politicians and others use construction of a massive fence as a proxy to avoid addressing real issues.[32] Legal issuesBirthright citizenshipThe Fourteenth Amendment has been interpreted by the United States Supreme Court, in precedent set by United States v. Wong Kim Ark, to grant citizenship to nearly every child born in the U.S. regardless of the citizenship of the parents, with the exception of the children of diplomats and children born to enemy forces in hostile occupation of the United States. The Court in Wong Kim Ark did not explicitly decide whether U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants are "subject to the jurisdiction of the United States" (it was not necessary to answer this question since Wong Kim Ark's parents were legally present in the United States at the time of his birth). However, the Supreme Court's later ruling in Plyler v. Doe[33] stated that illegal immigrants are "within the jurisdiction" of the states in which they reside, and added in a footnote that "no plausible distinction with respect to Fourteenth Amendment "jurisdiction" can be drawn between resident aliens whose entry into the United States was lawful, and resident aliens whose entry was unlawful." Immigration Reform and Control ActThe Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) made the hiring of an individual without documents an offense for the first time. The act is somewhat redundant since the forging of government documents (fake immigration documents or providing falsified social security numbers) is already a felony, and for most companies such documents must be provided to the government in its tax filings. However, the government does not notify those whose identities have been stolen for the falsified social security numbers, thus making it difficult to estimate the extent of the problem. [47] Immigration with and without quotasThe immigration quota system was first expanded with the Emergency Quota Act of 1921 which was used to reduce the influx of East and Southern European immigrants who were coming to the country in large numbers from the turn of the century. This immigration was further reduced by the Immigration Act of 1924 which was structured to maintain the cultural and ethnic traditions of the United States. The Franklin D. Roosevelt administration had nearly shut down immigration during the decade of the Great Depression of 1929. In 1929 there were 279,678 immigrants recorded and in 1933 there were only 23,068 [48]. By 1939 recorded immigrants had crept back up to 82,998 but then the advent of World War II drove it back down to 23,725 in 1943 increasing slowly to 38,119 by 1945 [49]. After 1946 about 600,000 of Europe's Displaced Person (DP's) refugees were admitted under special laws outside the country quotas, and in the 1960s and 1970s large numbers of Cuban and Vietnamese refugees [50] were admitted under special laws outside all quotas. Congress passed the Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965 which essentially removed all nation-specific quotas, while retaining an overall quota, and included immigrants from Mexico and the Western Hemisphere for the first time with their own quotas. It also put a large part of immigration, so-called family reunification, outside the quota system. This dramatically changed the number, type and composition of the new arrivals from mostly European, to predominantly poor Latino and Asian. It also dramatically increased the number of illegal aliens as many poorer people now had family or friends in the U.S. that attracted them there. [51] In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) was passed, creating amnesty for about 3,000,000 illegal aliens already in the United States. Critics believe IRCA just intensified the illegal immigration flow as those granted amnesty illegally brought more of their friends and family into the U.S.. [52] Without quotas on large segments of the immigration flow, legal immigration to the U.S. surged and soon became largely family based "Chain immigration" where families brought in a chain of off quota new immigrant family members. The number of legal immigrants rose from about 2.5 million in the 1950s to 4.5 million in the 1970s to 7.3 million in the 1980s to about 10 million in the 1990s. In 2006 legal immigrants to the United States now number approximately 1,000,000 legal immigrants per year of which about 600,000 are Change of Status immigrants who already are in the U.S. (Pew Hispanic Data Estimates[53], [54]) (Pew Hispanic Data Estimates[55], [56]) Matrícula ConsularA controversial alternative to fake IDs and other illegal practices is the Matricula Consular ID being used in the U.S., which is issued by Mexican consulates. This document is accepted at financial institutions in many states of the union and, with an IRS Taxpayer Identification Number, allows illegal immigrants to open checking and saving accounts. This has benefited American companies and banks who profit from remmittances of migrants towards their place of origin, while allowing immigrants to save money and identify themselves.[57] A recent article claims that many US corporations "have decided that a market of 11 million or so potential customers is simply too big to ignore," noting that while such persons are illegal residents, that nevertheless "there's nothing illegal about selling to them," despite concerns that doing business with them may aggravate groups opposed to illegal immigration.[34] REAL ID ActThe passage of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (a part of Public Law P.L. 109-13) prohibits States from issuing identification or driver's permit cards to anyone who cannot demonstrate that they are legally in the USA, taking full effect in 2008. Citizenship and/or immigration status is to be clearly denoted on these ID cards and they automatically expire on the expiration date of non-citizens' visas or other authorizing documentation. These IDs will be tied to online databases which will allow instant verification of the validity of these documents at low cost or no cost to the person seeking verification. As of 2006, the anticipated effect of this legislation is to make it increasingly difficult for illegal immigrants to use counterfeit documents to or to live and work illegally in the USA. However, at the same time, the REAL ID Act of 2005 effectively imposes a mandatory national ID for all US Citizens as well.[58] Historical contextEvery wave of immigration into the United States has faced fear and hostility, especially during times of economic hardship, political turmoil, or war: in 1882, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, one of the nation's first immigration laws, to keep out all people of Chinese origin; during the "Red Scare" of the 1920s, thousands of foreign-born people suspected of political radicalism were arrested and brutalized; many were deported without a hearing; and in 1942, 120,000 Americans of Japanese descent were interned in camps until the end of World War II. Chinese experienceIn 1882, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which was passed due to the belief that Chinese laborers were unfair competition and lowered wages of native born Americans. Anti-Chinese sentiment was also present for fear that Chinese immigrants were unable to assimilate. In 1882 the Chinese Exclusion Act had cut off nearly all Chinese immigration. The first laws creating a quota for immigrants were passed in the 1920s, in response to a sense that the country could no longer absorb large numbers of unskilled workers, despite pleas by big business that it wanted the new workers. Ngai (2003) shows that the new laws were the beginning of mass illegal immigration, because they created a new class of persons — illegal aliens — whose inclusion in the nation was at once a social reality and a legal impossibility. This contradiction challenged received notions of sovereignty and democracy in several ways. First, the increase in the number of illegal entries created a new emphasis on control of the nation's borders — especially the long Canadian border. Second, the application of the deportation laws gave rise to an oppositional political and legal discourse, which imagined "deserving" and "undeserving" illegal aliens and, therefore, just and unjust deportations. These categories were constructed out of modern ideas about crime, sexual morality, the family, and race. In the 1930s federal deportation policy became the object of legal reform to allow for administrative discretion in deportation cases. Just as restriction and deportation "made" illegal aliens, administrative discretion "unmade" illegal aliens. Administrative law reform became an unlikely site where problems of national belonging and inclusion played out. History of border securityFor a period of time in the 1990s U.S. Army personnel were stationed along the U.S.-Mexico border to help stem the flow of illegal aliens and drug smugglers. These military units brought their specialized equipment such as FLIR infrared devices, and helicopters. In conjunction with the U.S. Border Patrol, they would deploy along the border and, for a brief time, there would be no traffic across that border which was actively watched by "coyotes" paid to assist border crossers. The smugglers and the alien traffickers ceased operations over the one hundred mile sections of the border sealed at a time. After the September 11, 2001 attacks the United States looked at the feasibility of placing soldiers along the U.S.-Mexico border as a security measure. [59] According to many US Border Patrol agents, they were instructed by their leadership during 2005 to "keep new arrests to an "absolute minimum" to offset the effect of the Minuteman vigil, adding that patrols along the border have been severely limited" as one US Border Patrol agent put it [60]. In December, 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to build a separation barrier along parts of the border not already protected by a separation barriers. A later vote in the United States Senate on May 17, 2006, included a plan to blockade 860 miles of the border with vehicle barriers and triple-layer fencing along with granting an "earned path to citizenship" to the 12 million undocumented workers in the U.S. and roughly doubling legal immigration (from their 1970's levels). In 2006 the Senate approved 370 miles of new double- and triple-layered fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers and then refused to fund them. In December, the House voted for 700 miles of new barriers. Neither was able to reach a compromise bill. There is no assurance that if built, these new layers of protection will reduce the flow of illegal migrants from Mexico. See US-Mexico barrier. Controversy and viewpointsAccording to a Time magazine poll taken nationally in the United States
A recent Zogby poll[61] found that
According to a 2002 Zogby International poll[62] Asked whether they believe that "The territory of the United States' southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico"
In the same poll[63], Asked whether they believe that "Mexicans should have the right to enter the U.S. without U.S. permission,"
Harvard Professor George Borjas asserts, "The critical issue is how much we care about the well-being of immigrants compared with that of the Americans who win and the Americans who lose." [64] Philip Martin, of the University of California, Davis concurs, "Perhaps this is why immigration is such a political hot potato; it's mostly a distribution issue and, for governments that are in the business of redistributing income via taxes and subsidies, regulating immigration is another redistribution tool." [65] In the 2001–2006 National Development Plan the Mexican Government says they want to support the 18 million Mexicans who live outside Mexico. There is no information on this report on the source of the data or on the number of those illegal aliens who live in the United States.[36] Bay Buchanan, head of Team America, an immigration reduction political action committee, claimed that the 1990s-era border security program Operation Gatekeeper cut down unauthorized immigration by 90%. The actual numbers are not quite that high with 565,581 apprehensions in San Diego district in fiscal year 1992 before Operation Gatekeeper and its enhanced border fencing and policing to a low of 100,681 apprehensions in 2002 — an 82% reduction. Apprehensions in 2006 are at 138,608 or a 75% reduction. [66] However, the number of apprehensions may not correlate with a reduction in unauthorized immigration [67]. Apprehensions have gone up in other areas as border security was enhanced in San Diego and El Paso which saw a similar drop in apprehensions. 2004 illegal immigration debateIn 2004, United States President George W. Bush proposed a guest worker program to absorb migrant laborers who would otherwise come to the U.S. as illegal aliens. However, the details were left to legislators. In 2005, the Congress began creating legislation to change the current illegal immigration policies. The legislation approved by the U.S. House of Representatives led to massive protests. See also 2006 United States immigration reform protests. Professor Wayne A. Cornelius, (U.C. Davis) summed up his opinion of the problems of illegal US immigration as follows: “Consequences predicted by advocates of the concentrated border enforcement strategy have not yet materialized: there is no evidence that unauthorized migration is being deterred at the point of origin; that would-be illegal entrants are being discouraged at the border after multiple apprehensions by the Border Patrol and returning home; that their employment prospects in the US have been curtailed; or that the resident population of undocumented immigrants is shrinking.”[37][68]
NativismAccording to a 2006 report by the Anti-Defamation League, white supremacists and other far-right extremists are engaging in a growing number of violent assaults against legal and illegal immigrants and those perceived to be immigrants.[38] In 2006, Phoenix KFYI talk show host Brian James suggested on the air that a solution to the immigration problem in Arizona would be to kill illegal immigrants on random nights as they cross the border. James told listeners later in the March 8 show that he does not advocate shooting illegal aliens, according to Laurie Cantillo (the program manager), and the radio station did not receive a single listener complaint; Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard and U.S. Attorney Paul Charlton called the remarks "irresponsible and dangerous".[39] According to the web site, Dissident Voice, in 2006, Nashville radio talk show host Phil Valentine said during Demagnetize America, an anti-immigrant meeting, that he thought the U.S. Border Patrol Agents should consider shooting undocumented immigrants as they come across the border.[40] In 2005, New Jersey radio talk show host Hal Turner encouraged to "Kill illegal aliens as they cross into the U.S. When the stench of rotting corpses gets bad enough, the rest will stay away."[41] "In 1999, more than one-third (36.3 percent) of foreign-born full-time, year-round workers earned less than $20,000 compared to one fifth (21.3 percent) of their native counterparts" TerminologyThe Immigration and Nationality Act is the primary body of federal immigration law in the United States. It defines the term "alien" as “any person not a citizen or national of the United States.” It defines the term “immigrant” to mean every alien not falling within a set of “classes of nonimmigrant aliens” spelled out in detail by the act, for example: diplomatic personal, students residing within the US to attend school, athletes attending athletic events, ship and aircraft crew members; and others residing or staying within the United States on a temporary basis. The act classifies aliens remaining within the US on a permanent basis as immigrants without regards to an individual’s legal status.[42] There are a variety of terms which can be found in government agency news releases, photo captions, and reports. These terms include undocumented immigrant, unauthorized immigrant, illegal immigrant, undocumented migrant, unauthorized migrant, migrant, unauthorized immigrant worker, illegal migrant, illegal alien, undocumented alien, unauthorized worker and unauthorized resident. The Associated Press Stylebook, the primary style and usage guide for most newspapers and newsmagazines in the United States, recommends using "illegal immigrant" rather than "illegal alien" or "undocumented worker"[69]. According to Voice of America's Wordmaster, a weekly analysis of | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
