Geskiedenis Podcasts

Hoe het die handhawing van die grens tussen die VSA en Mexiko mettertyd verander?

Hoe het die handhawing van die grens tussen die VSA en Mexiko mettertyd verander?

My vraag hier is: 'Hoe het die handhawing (en houding) teenoor die grens tussen die VSA en Mexiko mettertyd verander?


Die VSA het 'n lang geskiedenis van gespanne grensverhoudinge met Mexiko, veral vroeg in die geskiedenis van Mexiko. Nieu -Spanje, wat later Mexiko geword het, was dikwels 'n plek waar slawe van hul meesters sou vlug. Texas verklaar onafhanklikheid van Mexiko in 1821 en daar word oorlog gevoer. Mexiko het slawerny in 1829 afgeskaf en veroorsaak dat meer slawe in die VSA daarheen vlug en spanning toeneem. Lees meer hier. Mexiko het geweier om die nuwe grense vir Texas te aanvaar, wat van 1846-1848 tot die Mexikaanse-Amerikaanse oorlog gelei het.

Die VSA het groot gebiede gekry wat eens in Mexiko se besit was. slawerny is kort daarna in die Amerikaanse burgeroorlog in die VSA afgeskaf. Deur die lees van verskillende materiaal uit daardie tyd, het die houding meer verander ten opsigte van kommer oor die integrasie van die nuwe Mexikaanse burgers in die Amerikaanse samelewing in plaas van die afdwinging van grense of die voorkoming van 'n vloei van Amerikaanse of Mexikaanse burgers oor die grens. Miskien was daar 'n besorgdheid om inheemse Amerikaners op hierdie tydstip te verhinder om die grens vrylik oor te steek, aangesien die Amerikaanse weermag hulle op voorbehoude wou hou, wat nie altyd suksesvol was nie.

In die 20ste eeu het die kommer verskuif na migrante Mexikaanse arbeid tydens die Groot Depressie. Pogings is aangewend om die aantal arbeiders te beperk deur van werkgewers te vereis dat hulle werkvisums vir hulle het. Baie Mexikane is ook tydens die Groot Depressie gedeporteer. Kwotas vir werkers en deportasies is weer in die 1940's-1964's gebruik toe die ekonomiese toestande versleg het na die Tweede Wêreldoorlog, onder die 'Bracero-program'. en "Operasie Wetback."

"Die Wet op Immigrasie en Nasionaliteit van 1965, ook bekend as die Hart-Cellar Act, het die stelsel van kwotas van nasionale oorsprong afgeskaf. Deur die immigrasiebeleid gelyk te maak, het die wet nuwe immigrasie van nie-Europese lande tot gevolg gehad ..." Wikipedia. Die VSA het sedert hierdie tyd grootliks soortgelyke immigrasie -handhawing gebruik, maar daar is baie wat dit om baie redes wil verander, soos internasionale terrorisme of dwelmkartelgeweld wat hierdie antwoord nie aanspreek nie. So is dit in die nuus.


Beveiliging en bestuur van ons grense

Die beskerming van die land se grense - land, lug en see - teen die onwettige toegang van mense, wapens, dwelms en smokkelaars is noodsaaklik vir ons tuisveiligheid, sowel as vir ekonomiese welvaart. DHS het die afgelope paar jaar ongekende vlakke van personeel, tegnologie en hulpbronne na die suidwestelike grens ontplooi. Terselfdertyd het DHS kritieke veiligheidsverbeterings langs die noordelike grens aangebring deur te belê in ekstra grenspatrollie -agente, tegnologie en infrastruktuur, terwyl dit ook die pogings versterk het om die veiligheid van die land se maritieme grense te verhoog.


5 dinge om te weet oor Obama se handhawing van immigrasiewette

'N Border Patrol -agent kyk op 13 April in Weslaco, Texas, na voetspore naby die Amerikaanse grens met Mexiko.

In 'n toespraak Woensdagaand sal Donald Trump sy voorgestelde immigrasiebeleid uiteensit - en verduidelik.

Dit lyk asof sy standpunt oor immigrasie die afgelope tien dae meer verander het as in die afgelope tien maande.

Maar miskien is die mees onverwagte element van die onlangse verskuiwings in retoriek dat Trump die werk van president Obama oor immigrasiehandhawing geprys het, 'n verrassende wending vir 'n Republikeinse kandidaat.

"Wat mense nie weet nie, is dat Obama 'n groot aantal mense uit die land gekry het. Bush, dieselfde ding. Baie mense is uit die land gebring met die bestaande wette. Wel, ek gaan dieselfde doen ding, ”het Trump verlede week aan Bill O'Reilly van Fox News gesê.

Dit is waar, tot 'n mate. Voor Trump se toespraak, is hier vyf dinge wat u moet weet oor hoe president Obama die afgelope agt jaar immigrasiewette toegepas het.

1. Deporsies het aanvanklik toegeneem onder president Obama.

Deportasies, of "verwyderings" soos die Departement van Binnelandse Veiligheid dit noem, het toegeneem in elk van die eerste vier jaar wat president Obama in die amp was, met 'n hoogtepunt van 400 000 in die boekjaar 2012. Obama het toesig gehou oor meer deportasies as wat George W. Bush gedoen het, net soos Bush meer as Bill Clinton toesig gehou het. Die neiging tot toenemende deportasies het begin met die aanvaarding van die Wet op Onwettige Immigrasie en Immigrant Verantwoordelikheid in 1996 en versnel na die aanvalle van 11 September, met groeiende begrotings vir die DHS -agentskappe wat immigrasiewet afdwing. Formele verwydering het grootliks die informele "terugkeer" vir diegene wat onwettig in die land gevang is, vervang. Opheffing hou strenger gevolge in, en dit word toenemend sonder geregtelike hersiening uitgevoer.

2. Deportasies het die afgelope drie jaar gedaal.

Deportasies bereik 'n hoogtepunt in die boekjaar 2012 en het sedertdien in elk van die drie jaar afgeneem en in die boekjaar 2015 tot 235 413 gedaal. Volgens Amerikaanse doeane- en grensbeskerming loop die kommer tot dusver vanjaar effens voor 2015, maar ver onder die tempo van die twee vorige jare. Boonop neem die deportasies uit die binneland van die Verenigde State geleidelik af sedert die eerste jaar van die Obama -administrasie.

3. Die kans op deportasie hang baie af van aardrykskunde en tydsberekening.

President Obama se benadering tot immigrasie -handhawing is eintlik twee baie verskillende benaderings: een vir diegene wat naby die grens gevang word, die ander vir immigrante wat onwettig in die binneland woon. Hoe lank 'n immigrant hier is, maak ook 'n verskil. Net soos ander voorheen, sê die Obama -administrasie dat dit nie die hulpbronne of die begeerte het om miljoene immigrante wie se enigste misdaad die land onwettig binnekom het, te deporteer nie. Dit het sy handhawingspogings dus gefokus op spesifieke doelwitte: naamlik diegene wat naby die grens gevang is, diegene wat misdade gepleeg het en diegene wat blykbaar in 2014 of later aangekom het.

'Die resultaat is skerp verskillende handhawingsfoto's aan die grens en binne die Verenigde State,' volgens 'n verslag van die nie -partydige Migrasiebeleidinstituut. "Aan die grens is daar 'n stelsel van byna nul -verdraagsaamheid, waar ongemagtigde immigrante toenemend onderworpe is aan formele verwydering en strafregtelike aanklagte. Binne die land is daar meer buigsaamheid."

Politiek

Vloei Trump op immigrasie? Ja of nee, dit was beslis verwarrend

In die laaste jaar van die Bush -administrasie was 64 persent van die deportasies uit die binneland van die land. Teen verlede jaar het binnelandse deportasies tot minder as 30 persent van die totaal gekrimp. Terwyl die Obama-administrasie die handhawingspogings langs die grens toegespits het, het nie almal besef dat daar 'n nuwe aankoms is nie. Sommige het moontlik jarelange bande en familielede elders in die VSA

Die administrasie beklemtoon dat 'n groeiende deel van diegene wat gedeporteer word kriminele rekords het: 59 persent verlede jaar, 'n styging van 31 persent in die boekjaar 2008.

4. Onwettige immigrasie uit Mexiko het die afgelope paar jaar gedaal, maar baie uit Sentraal -Amerika probeer nog steeds oorsteek.

Grenspatrollie-bekommernisse, wat die regering as 'n barometer van onwettige grensoorskrydingspogings beskou, het die afgelope anderhalf dekade gedaal. Die grenspatrollie het 337,117 mense landwyd in die boekjaar 2015 aangekeer. Dit is byna 30 persent laer as die vorige jaar en byna 80 persent onder die hoogtepunt in 2000. Maandelikse syfers tot en met Julie vanjaar toon 'n effense styging, maar die kommer is steeds ver onder 2014 vlakke.

Einde verlede jaar het die Pew Research Center berig dat die afgelope vyf jaar meer Mexikane die Verenigde State verlaat het as wat hulle binnegekom het. Die sentrum het sterk grenshandhawing voorgestel en 'n stadig groeiende Amerikaanse ekonomie het daartoe bygedra dat dit 'een van die grootste massamigrasies in die moderne geskiedenis' was.

Alhoewel die toestroming van grensoorgangers uit Mexiko moontlik vertraag of gestop het, lok die VSA steeds 'n aansienlike aantal immigrante uit Sentraal-Amerika. Beamptes wat die suidwestelike grens van die Verenigde State patrolleer, het gedurende die eerste tien maande van die boekjaar 172 165 immigrante uit ander lande as Mexiko aangekeer.

5. Die administrasie het sy diskresie gebruik om immigrasiehandhawing te vorm, behalwe wanneer die federale howe nee gesê het.

In 2012 verleen die administrasie tydelike uitstel van deportasie aan sekere immigrante wat as kinders onwettig na hierdie land gebring is. Meer as 600 000 jongmense het voordeel getrek uit die aanbod, wat hulle ook in staat gestel het om werkpermitte te kry.


Hoe Amerikaanse immigrasiewette en -reëls deur die geskiedenis verander het

Die Verenigde State het begin met die regulering van immigrasie kort nadat dit onafhanklikheid van Groot -Brittanje verower het, en die wette sedert dit uitgevaardig is, weerspieël die politiek en migrantestrome van die tyd. Vroeë wetgewing het geneig om perke op te lê wat die Europeërs bevoordeel het, maar 'n ingrypende wet van 1965 het deure oopgemaak vir immigrante uit ander dele van die wêreld. In meer onlangse jare is wette en presidensiële optrede gevorm deur kommer oor vlugtelinge, ongemagtigde immigrasie en terrorisme.

'N Wet uit 1790 was die eerste wat spesifiseer wie 'n burger kan word, en beperk die voorreg tot blankes van' goeie morele karakter 'wat ten minste twee jaar in die VSA gewoon het. In 1870 is die reg op burgerskap uitgebrei tot dié van Afrika -oorsprong.

Probeer ons e -poskursus oor immigrasie

Leer meer oor Amerikaanse immigrasie deur vyf kort lesse wat elke tweede dag in u inkassie afgelewer word.
Teken nou in!

Vanaf 1875 is 'n reeks beperkings op immigrasie ingestel. Dit het verbod op misdadigers, mense met aansteeklike siektes, poligamiste, anargiste, bedelaars en invoerders van prostitute ingesluit. Ander beperkings was gerig op die toenemende aantal Asiatiese immigrante, wat eers migrasie uit China beperk en later immigrasie uit die meeste Asiatiese lande verbied het.

Teen die vroeë 1900's het die land se oorheersende immigrasiestroom wegbeweeg van Noord- en Wes -Europese lande en na Suid- en Oos -Europa. In reaksie hierop is wette in 1921 en 1924 aangeneem om vroeëre immigrasiepatrone te probeer herstel deur die totale jaarlikse immigrasie te beperk en numeriese kwotas op te lê op grond van immigrante -nasionaliteit wat Noord- en Wes -Europese lande bevoordeel het.

Langdurige immigrasiebeperkings het in 1943 begin verbrokkel, toe 'n wet 'n beperkte aantal Chinese toegelaat het om te immigreer. In 1952 het wetgewing 'n beperkte aantal visums vir ander Asiërs toegelaat, en ras is formeel verwyder as gronde vir uitsluiting. Alhoewel 'n presidensiële kommissie aanbeveel dat die kwotastelsel van nasionale oorsprong geskrap word, het die kongres nie saamgestem nie.

In 1965 het 'n kombinasie van politieke, sosiale en geopolitieke faktore egter gelei tot die goedkeuring van die belangrikste immigrasie- en nasionaliteitswet wat 'n nuwe stelsel geskep het wat gesinshereniging en geskoolde immigrante bevoordeel, eerder as landkwotas. Die wet stel ook die eerste perke op immigrasie uit die Westelike Halfrond. Voor die tyd was Latyns -Amerikaners toegelaat om sonder veel beperkings die VSA binne te gaan. Sedert die inwerkingtreding van die Wet op Immigrasie en Nasionaliteit van 1965, is immigrasie oorheers deur mense wat in Asië en Latyns -Amerika gebore is, eerder as in Europa.

Verskeie wette het sedertdien gefokus op vlugtelinge, wat die weg gebaan het vir die toegang tot Indochinese vlugtelinge wat in die sewentigerjare van oorlogsgeweld vlug en later verligting vir ander nasionaliteite insluitend Chinese, Nicaraguane en Haïtiane. 'N Wet uit 1990 het die' tydelike beskermingsstatus 'geskep wat immigrante, hoofsaaklik Sentraal -Amerikaners, beskerm het teen deportasie na lande wat natuurrampe, gewapende konflikte of ander buitengewone toestande ondervind.

In 1986 het die Kongres nog 'n groot wet uitgevaardig - die Immigrasiehervormings- en Beheerwet - wat wettiging verleen het aan miljoene ongemagtigde immigrante, hoofsaaklik uit Latyns -Amerika, wat aan sekere voorwaardes voldoen het. Die wet het ook sanksies opgelê op werkgewers wat ongemagtigde immigrante gehuur het. Latere wette in 1996, 2002 en 2006 was reaksies op kommer oor terrorisme en ongemagtigde immigrasie. Hierdie maatreëls beklemtoon die grensbeheer, gee prioriteit aan die handhawing van wette oor die aanstelling van immigrante en het die toelating tot toelating verskerp.


Immigrasie in die Verenigde State: nuwe ekonomiese, sosiale, politieke landskappe met wetgewende hervorming op die horison

Immigrasie het die Verenigde State as 'n land gevorm sedert die eerste nuwelinge meer as 400 jaar gelede aangekom het. Behalwe dat dit 'n kragtige demografiese mag was wat verantwoordelik was vir hoe die land en sy bevolking geword het soos dit vandag is, het immigrasie baie bygedra tot baie van die ekonomiese, sosiale en politieke prosesse wat die grondslag van die Verenigde State as 'n nasie is.

Alhoewel immigrasie deur die Amerikaanse geskiedenis plaasgevind het, het grootskaalse immigrasie gedurende slegs vier spitsperiodes plaasgevind: die bevolking van die oorspronklike kolonies, uitbreiding na die weste gedurende die middel van die 19de eeu en die opkoms van stede aan die begin van die 20ste eeu. Die vierde hoogtepunt begin in die 1970's en duur vandag nog voort.

Hierdie hoogtepunt -immigrasieperiodes het saamgeval met fundamentele transformasies van die Amerikaanse ekonomie. Die eerste keer het die Europese nedersetting in die Amerikas aangebreek. Die tweede het die jong Verenigde State toegelaat om van 'n koloniale na 'n landbou -ekonomie oor te gaan. Die industriële rewolusie het gedurende die derde spitsperiode aanleiding gegee tot 'n vervaardigingsekonomie, wat Amerika se opkoms gedryf het om die leidende mag ter wêreld te word. Die grootskaalse immigrasie van vandag het saamgeval met globalisering en die laaste stadiums van transformasie van 'n vervaardigings- tot 'n kennisgebaseerde ekonomie in die 21ste eeu. Soos voorheen is immigrasie veroorsaak deur ekonomiese transformasie, net soos dit die Verenigde State help om aan te pas by nuwe ekonomiese realiteite.

Vir 'n land van immigrante en immigrasie pas die Verenigde State sy immigrasiebeleid maar selde aan, hoofsaaklik omdat die politiek rondom immigrasie diep verdeeld kan wees. As gevolg hiervan is die immigrasiebeleid dikwels toenemend losgemaak van die ekonomiese en sosiale kragte wat immigrasie dryf. As daar veranderinge aangebring is, het dit oor die algemeen jare geneem om wetgewing te maak.

Vandag staan ​​die Verenigde State moontlik op die drumpel van groot nuwe hervormings wat die langdurige probleme van onwettige immigrasie, sowel as die probleme in die wettige immigrasiestelsel, wat sedert 1990 nie bygewerk is nie, aanspreek. Die stukrag vir omvattende immigrasiehervorming (CIR) het teruggekeer na die kongresstadium, met tweepartige groepe in die Huis en die Senaat wat beduidende onderhandelinge gevoer het om wetgewing uit te voer wat die handhawing by die land se grense en binnekant sou verhoog, die beraamde 11 miljoen ongemagtigde immigrante van die land wettig maak en regsgeleenthede bied vir werkgewers in die Verenigde State om toegang te kry tot toekomstige werkers wat hulle nodig het. CIR, in die een of ander vorm, is sedert ten minste 2001 in oorweë, met groot debatte in die senaat in 2006 en 2007. Na die mislukking van die CIR -wetgewing in die senaat in 2007, is die poging om die immigrasiewette van die land te hervorm, opsy gesit . Die uitslae en stempatrone van die presidentsverkiesing in 2012 het aan beide politieke partye nuwe redes gegee om weer na 'n immigrasiehervormingsagenda te kyk.

Hierdie landsprofiel ondersoek belangrike wetgewende gebeurtenisse wat die geskiedenis van die Amerikaanse immigrasiestelsel vorm, die grootte en kenmerke van die immigrantebevolking in die land, die kenmerke van wettige en onwettige immigrasiestrome, Amerikaanse beleid vir vlugtelinge en asielsoekers, pogings tot integrasie van immigrante, immigrasietendense na die resessie, immigrasiehandhawing, immigrasiebeleid tydens president Obama se administrasie en vooruitsigte vir hervormingswetgewing.

In die dekades voor 1880 was immigrasie na die Verenigde State hoofsaaklik Europese, gedryf deur kragte soos industrialisasie in Wes -Europa en die Ierse aartappelhongersnood. Die uitbreidende grense van die Amerikaanse Weste en die industriële revolusie van die Verenigde State het immigrante na die Amerikaanse kus gelok. Chinese immigrante het in die 1850's vir die eerste keer in groot getalle begin aankom nadat goud in Kalifornië in 1848 ontdek is.

Federale toesig oor immigrasie het in 1882 begin toe die Kongres die Immigrasiewet goedgekeur het. Dit het 'n heffing bepaal van elke nie -burger wat by 'n Amerikaanse hawe aankom om deur die ministerie van finansies gebruik te word om immigrasie te reguleer. Aankomende immigrante is vir die eerste keer onder hierdie wet ondersoek, en toegang deur iemand wat as 'n "veroordeelde, kranksinnige, idioot of persoon wat nie in staat was om vir homself of haarself te sorg nie, as 'n openbare aanklag beskou word, is verbied.

Namate die mynbou in die Weste begin bedaar het, het vyandigheid teenoor die groot bevolking van Chinese arbeiders en ander buitelanders toegeneem, en so het 'n reeks wetgewende maatreëls begin om immigrasie van sekere rassegroepe te beperk, wat begin met onderdane van China. Die Chinese uitsluitingswet van 1882 was die eerste sodanige wet. Dit het die immigrasie van Chinese arbeiders tien jaar lank gestop, Chinese naturalisasie belet en voorsiening gemaak vir die deportasie van Chinese in die land onwettig. In 'n opvolgwetsontwerp het die Kongres die Scott Act van 1888 aangeneem en die terugkeer van Chinese onderdane met wettige status in die Verenigde State verbied as hulle die land verlaat. In 1892 het die Geary-wet die tienjarige bar oor Chinese arbeidsimmigrasie verleng en 'n beperkende beleid ingestel teenoor Chinese immigrante met en sonder wettige status.

Tussen 1880 en 1930 het meer as 27 miljoen nuwe immigrante aangekom, hoofsaaklik uit Italië, Duitsland, Oos -Europa, Rusland, Brittanje, Kanada, Ierland en Swede. Hierdie hoogtepunt-immigrasietydperk-die laaste grootskaalse immigrasiegolf voor die huidige tydperk-het ook tot nuwe beperkings gelei.

In 'n uitbreiding van rasse -uitsluiting, en deur 'n presidensiële veto te oorheers, het die Kongres die immigrasiewet van 1917 goedgekeur wat immigrasie verbied het uit 'n nuutgetekende 'Asiatiese versperringsone' wat Britse Indië, die grootste deel van Suidoos -Asië en byna die hele Midde -Ooste dek. Dit het ook die ontoelaatbaarheidsgronde uitgebrei tot anargiste, persone wat voorheen gedeporteer is in die afgelope jaar en ongeletterde individue ouer as 16 jaar.

Die nativistiese en restriktionistiese sentiment het tot in die twintigerjare voortgeduur, wat die Verenigde State aangespoor het om vir die eerste keer numeriese beperkings op immigrasie in te stel. Die Wet op Immigrasie en Naturalisasie van 1924 het die kwotasisteem van nasionale oorsprong ingestel, wat 'n plafon stel vir die aantal immigrante wat uit elke land in die Verenigde State toegelaat kan word. Dit was 'n sterk voorstander van Noord- en Wes -Europese immigrasie. Die Wet op Immigrasie en Nasionaliteit van 1952 het die kwotastelsel van nasionale oorsprong voortgesit, maar het vir die eerste keer 'n immigrasie-kwota aan Asiatiese lande toegeken.

Alhoewel die diskriminerende aard van die kwotasisteem van nasionale oorsprong al hoe meer in diskrediet gekom het, het dit tot die Kennedy-era en die rimpeleffekte van die burgerregtebeweging van die land geduur, totdat 'n nuwe filosofie wat immigrasie lei, posgevat het. Die gevolglike wysigings van die immigrasie- en nasionaliteitswet van 1965 het die kwotastelsel van nasionale oorsprong herroep en vervang met 'n voorkeurstelsel van sewe kategorieë wat hoofsaaklik op gesinsvereniging gebaseer was. Oor die algemeen het die wetgewing kragtige kragte aan die gang gesit wat die Verenigde State vandag nog vorm.

Die wet van 1965 het die numeriese perke op immigrasie verhoog van 154,000 tot 290,000. 'N Plafon vir immigrasie uit die Amerikas (120 000) is vir die eerste keer ingestel, en 'n per-land perk van 20,000 is vir Oos-Europa vasgestel. Die nuwe pette het nie 'onmiddellike familielede' van Amerikaanse burgers (eggenote, minderjarige kinders en ouers) ingesluit nie. In 1976 is die limiet van 20 000 per graaf op die Westelike Halfrond toegepas.

Die jaar voor die 1965-wet het die kongres die Bracero-program beëindig, wat hy tydens die Tweede Wêreldoorlog gemagtig het om landbouwerkers uit Mexiko te werf om plaasarbeidstekorte in die Verenigde State op te los. In die nasleep van hierdie en ander ingrypende veranderings in die wêreldekonomie, het immigrasiestrome wat die grootste deel van die land se geskiedenis oorheers is, plek gemaak vir hoofsaaklik Latyns-Amerikaanse en Asiatiese immigrasie.

Die grootskaalse immigrasie van vandag begin in die sewentigerjare en bestaan ​​uit wettige en onwettige vloei. Vorige periodes van grootskaalse immigrasie het plaasgevind voordat visums aan numeriese plafonne onderworpe was, dus is die verskynsel van 'onwettige immigrasie' 'n relatief onlangse element van die immigrasiebeleidgeskiedenis en debatte.

Die grootste bron van wettige toelating, Mexiko, was ook verantwoordelik vir die grootste deel van onwettige immigrante wat die suidwestelike grens met die Verenigde State oorsteek om die relatief hoër lone te kry wat beskikbaar is by Amerikaanse werk.

Teen die middel van die tagtigerjare woon ongeveer 3 tot 5 miljoen nie-burgers onwettig in die land. Om onwettige immigrasie aan te spreek, het die Kongres die Immigrasiehervormings- en Beheerwet van 1986 (IRCA) goedgekeur, wat bedoel was om as 'n "driebeenstoelgang" op te tree. IRCA het die volgende ingesluit:

  • Sanksies teen werkgewers wat bewustelik ongemagtigde werknemers aangestel het, insluitend boetes en kriminele strawwe wat bedoel is om die huur van ongemagtigde immigrante te verminder
  • Verhoogde grenshandhawing wat daarop gemik is om die toetrede van toekomstige ongemagtigde immigrante te voorkom
  • Wettiging wat ongemagtigde immigrante wat minstens vyf jaar in die Verenigde State gewoon het (met 'n ligter maatreël vir landbouwerkers) 'n regstatus verleen het in 'n poging om die leisteen skoon te maak van onwettige immigrasie vir die toekoms. Die gesamentlike programme verleen wettige status aan 2,7 miljoen individue (uit 3 miljoen aansoekers).

Uiteindelik het IRCA om verskeie redes misluk. Eerstens het die wettigingsprogram 'n aansienlike deel van die ongemagtigde bevolking uitgesluit wat na die afsnydatum van vyf jaar gekom het, maar in die Verenigde State gebly het en die kern van 'n nuwe ongemagtigde bevolking geword het. Tweedens het verbeterings in grenshandhawing eers in die 1990's ernstig begin. En die kern van die wet - sanksies van werkgewers - het swak handhawingsbepalings gehad wat ondoeltreffend geblyk het om die verhuringspraktyke van 'n groot aantal ongemagtigde immigrante na te gaan.

Vier jaar later het die Kongres die Immigrasiewet van 1990 aangeneem om die wettige immigrasiestelsel op te knap en 'n groter deel van hoogs geskoolde en opgeleide immigrante toe te laat. Dit het wettige immigrasiebeperkings verhoog, die tydelike visumstelsel vir nie -immigrante aangepas en die gronde van ontoelaatbaarheid en deportasie hersien. Die wet het ook Temporary Protected Status (TPS) ingestel, wat 'n statutêre grondslag vir toestemming om in die Verenigde State te woon en te werk aan onderdane van lande wat as onveilig beskou kan word vir terugkeer as gevolg van gewapende konflik of natuurramp, geskep het.

In die algemeen was IRCA en die handhawingsmeganismes daarvan nie ooreen met die kragtige magte wat onwettige migrasie dryf nie. Sowel die IRCA as die 1990 -wet het nie voldoende voorsiening gemaak en maatreëls ingesluit om voortgesette vloei van tydelike en permanente immigrante te voorsien en te bestuur om aan die land se arbeidsmarkbehoeftes te voldoen nie, veral gedurende die ekonomiese bloeitydperk van die 1990's.

As gevolg hiervan het onwettige immigrasie dramaties toegeneem en begin dit nie net in die ses tradisionele immigrasiebestemmingsstate van New York, New Jersey, Florida, Texas, Illinois en Kalifornië nie, maar ook in baie ander gebiede in die suidooste, midweste, en bergstate wat tot 'n eeu lank nie ervaring gehad het met grootskaalse immigrasie nie. Alhoewel immigrasie gedien het as 'n bron van ekonomiese produktiwiteit en jonger werkers in gebiede waar die bevolking en die arbeidsmag besig was om te verouder, het 'n groot deel van die immigrasie bestaan ​​uit onwettige immigrasiestrome. Die uitdaging teenoor diepgaande oppergesag van die oppergesag van die reg en die sosiale verandering wat deur hierdie immigrasie verteenwoordig word, het geleidelik 'n negatiewe openbare gevoel oor immigrasie veroorsaak, wat daartoe gelei het dat die Kongres 'n stel streng nuwe wette in 1996 sou aanvaar, soos volg:

  • Die Wet op Versoening van Persoonlike Verantwoordelikheid en Werksgeleenthede (PRWORA), algemeen bekend as die Welsynshervormingswet, het toegang tot federale openbare voordele, soos Medicaid, Aanvullende Sekuriteitsinkomste (SSI), en voedselstempels vir kategorieë van gemagtigde en ongemagtigde immigrante geweier. Sommige state het later gekies om sommige van hierdie voordele weer in te stel vir gemagtigde immigrante wat onder PRWORA in aanmerking gekom het.
  • Die Wet op Onwettige Immigrasie en Immigrant Verantwoordelikheid (IIRIRA) versterk die handhawing van immigrasie, verhoog die boetes vir immigrasieverwante misdade, maak voorsiening vir die vinnige verwydering van ontoelaatbare nie-burgers, immigrante wat onwettig teenwoordig is vir lang tydperke en stel inkomstevereistes vas immigrante se familie borg op 125 persent van die federale armoedevlak. IIRIRA het ook van die regering vereis om buitelandse besoekers se inskrywings en uitgange op te spoor, wat 'n belangrike element in die regering se veiligheidstrategie geword het ná die 9/11 terreuraanvalle.
  • Die Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) het dit makliker gemaak om nie-burgers in hegtenis te neem, aan te hou en te deporteer.

Daarna het die Kongres in 2000 teruggekeer om wettige immigrasiemaatreëls te verskerp deur die Amerikaanse mededingendheid in die Wet op die een-en-twintigste eeu in te stel om aan die vraag na vaardige immigrante te voldoen-veral in wetenskap, wiskunde en ingenieurswese-en werkgewers in staat te stel 'n kritieke dimensie van die post-industriële, inligtingstydperk ekonomie. Die wet verhoog die jaarlikse aantal H-1B-visums wat aan hoogs geskoolde werkers in spesiale beroepe gegee is tot 115,000 in die boekjaar 2000, dan tot 195,000 vir 2001, 2002 en 2003. Op die oomblik is 65,000 H-1B-visums per jaar beskikbaar is, met 'n bykomende 20.000 H-1B-visums (as gevolg van 'n wet aan die einde van 2004) vir buitelandse gebore individue met gevorderde Amerikaanse grade.

Die negentigerjare was die langste periode van volgehoue ​​ekonomiese en werkgroei wat die Verenigde State sedert ten minste die Tweede Wêreldoorlog beleef het. Immigrasie - aan beide hoë en lae kant van die arbeidsmark, wettig en onwettig - was 'n belangrike element om die produktiwiteit en voorspoed van die dekade te bereik. Immigrasie het ook bygedra tot die ekonomiese transformasie wat nodig was vir die Verenigde State om in 'n globale ekonomie mee te ding. Met meer as 14 miljoen nuwelinge (wettig en onwettig) het die 1990's numeriese vlakke bereik wat die vorige hoogtepunt in die eerste dekade van die 20ste eeu oortref het. Die neiging het tot in die 2000's voortgeduur met meer as 16 miljoen nuwelinge van 2000-10.

Die blywende impak van 9/11 op immigrasiebeleid

Geen onlangse gebeurtenis het die denke en optrede van die Amerikaanse publiek en sy leiers beïnvloed nie, net soos die terreuraanvalle van 11 September 2001. In die byna 12 jaar sedert 9/11 het baie aspekte van die Amerikaanse immigrasiestelsel dramaties geword meer robuust. Die bedreiging van die nasionale veiligheid wat internasionale terrorisme inhou, het gelei tot die grootste herorganisasie van die federale regering sedert die Tweede Wêreldoorlog. Die opknapping het die samesmelting van 22 federale agentskappe tot gevolg gehad om die Departement van Binnelandse Veiligheid (DHS) in 2003 te stig.

Omdat die kapers van 9/11 geldige visums gekry het om na die Verenigde State te reis, ondanks die feit dat sommige dit by die Amerikaanse intelligensie ken en deur wetstoepassingsagentskappe teëgekom het, het die immigrasiestelsel veral onder die loep gekom. Die Immigrasie- en Naturalisasiediens (INS), wat sedert 1941 deel was van die Departement van Justisie, is ontbind en sy funksies is soos volg oorgedra aan drie nuutgeskepte agentskappe binne DHS:

  • Doeane en Grensbeskerming (CBP) hou toesig oor die toegang van alle mense en goedere by alle hawens en dwing wette af teen onwettige toegang tussen die hawens.
  • Immigrasie en Doeane -handhawing (ICE) is verantwoordelik vir die handhawing van immigrasie- en doeanevereistes in die binneland van die Verenigde State, insluitend werkgewervereistes, aanhouding en verwyderings.
  • Amerikaanse burgerskap en immigrasiedienste (USCIS) beoordeel immigrantevoordeelaansoeke, soos visumversoeke, naturalisasie-aansoeke en asiel- en vlugtelingversoeke, en administreer die E-Verify-program.

'N Bykomende nuwe post-9/11 immigrasie-entiteit was US-VISIT, wat in die National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) van DHS gevestig is. Dit bestuur die IDENT -biometriese vingerafdruk -inligtingstelsel wat deur alle immigrasie -agentskappe gebruik word - insluitend konsulate in die buiteland vir visumondersoek - om die identiteit van nie -burgers wat die land binnekom, te bevestig.

9/11 het ook gelei tot die aanvaarding van 'n reeks nuwe nasionale veiligheidswette met verreikende gevolge vir nie-burgers wat na die Verenigde State wil reis of woon. Die bekendste is die USA Patriot Act. Wat immigrasie betref, het die wet die bevoegdheid van wetstoepassingsbeamptes uitgebrei om vermeende terroriste te soek, te monitor, aan te hou en te verwyder, en het dit tot sewe dae lank die moontlikheid gegee dat buitelanders aangehou kan word voordat die regering strafregtelike of immigrasieklagte aanhangig maak. Dit het ook die grenshandhawing versterk, veral langs die noordelike grens met Kanada.

Wette wat daarop gevolg het, sluit in die Wet op die verbetering van grensveiligheid en hervorming van visum van 2002 (EBSVERA), wat visumsifting, grensinspeksies en opsporing van buitelandse gebore persone, insluitend buitelandse studente, verskerp, veral deur die gebruik van biometriese vingerafdrukrekords. Dit was ook 'n stukrag vir die opstel van die Amerikaanse -VISIT -program, aangesien die wetsontwerp stelsels vir inligting -uitdeling bevat wat nasionale veiligheidsdata beskikbaar gestel het aan immigrasiebeamptes wat verantwoordelik was vir die uitreiking van visums, die neem van besluite oor verwydering of opname, en vir ondersoeke en identifisering van nie -burgers.

In Junie 2002 begin die Amerikaanse prokureur-generaal met die National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS), 'n program wat ekstra reisondersoekvereistes aan onderdane gestel het uit 'n lys van 25 lande wat met 'n Al-Kaïda-teenwoordigheid (en Noord-Korea) verband hou. Boonop moes mans bo die ouderdom van 16 jaar, wat onderdane was van aangewese NSEERS -lande en reeds in die Verenigde State woon, by die federale regering registreer en verskyn vir 'spesiale registrasie' -onderhoude met immigrasiebeamptes. Die program is in 2011 gestaak.

In 2005 het die REAL ID Act state verbied om bestuurslisensies aan ongemagtigde persone uit te reik en het terrorisme-verwante gronde van ontoelaatbaarheid, verwydering en onbevoegdheid vir asiel uitgebrei. 'N Jaar later het die Secure Fence Act van 2006 die voltooiing van 700 myl omheining langs die suidwestelike grens met Mexiko gemagtig.

Verhoogde beveiligings- en datadelingmaatreëls wat na die aanvalle geneem is, het die regering in staat gestel om 'n doelwit na 9/11 te bereik om die grens uit te stoot. By screening individuals seeking to enter the United States more times and against more databases than ever before, those who pose a threat to the country can be prevented from ever reaching U.S. soil, often times before they even board a plane. This objective is being bolstered by increased collaboration with foreign governments in law enforcement matters and through international agreements that allow bilateral sharing of information such as Passenger Name Records (PNRs).

One immediate result of tightened screening procedures was a dramatic drop in the number of visas the government issued to individuals wishing to visit, work, and live in the United States. Between 2001 and 2002, the number of nonimmigrant visas fell by 24 percent. Present visa issuances have returned to pre-9/11 levels, but it has taken ten years to rebound.

A Profile of Today's Immigrant Population

The U.S. foreign-born population (legal and illegal) is 40.4 million, or 13 percent of the total U.S. population of 311.6 million, according to 2011 American Community Survey estimates. Although this is a numerical high historically, the foreign born make up a smaller percentage of the population today than in 1890 and 1910 when the immigrant share of the population peaked at 15 percent. The foreign-born share fell to a low of 5 percent (9.6 million) in 1970. About 20 percent of all international migrants reside in the United States, which, as a country, accounts for less than 5 percent of the world's population.

The foreign-born population is comprised of approximately 42 percent naturalized citizens, 31 percent permanent residents (green card holders), and 27 percent unauthorized immigrants. Roughly 11.7 million, or 29 percent of the immigrant population is from Mexico, the largest immigration source country. Chinese and Indian immigrants make up the second and third largest immigrant groups, with 1.9 million or 5 percent of the foreign-born population each. In 2010, India replaced the Philippines as the third largest source country (see Table 1). The top three regions of origin of the foreign-born population are Latin America, Asia, and Europe (see Figure 1).


Biden Immigration Changes Raise Hopes, Concerns on US-Mexico Border

LOS ANGELES - On the day U.S. President Joe Biden took office, he began dismantling former President Donald Trump’s policies at the southern U.S.-Mexico border.

Biden rescinded Trump’s declaration of a national emergency, suspended construction of Trump’s controversial border wall, and vowed to end governmental practices of migrant family separation and rapid-fire deportations.

The abrupt shift in policy almost overnight changed conditions and migrant expectations along the border – renewing hope for hundreds of thousands of migrants from Mexico and Central America of a return to more porous borders and pathways to legal status. But it also raised the concern of law enforcement officials and residents about a return of caravans, chaos and potential for violence.

Border policy changes accelerated dramatically this week as reports surfaced the Biden administration intends to release most parents and children seeking asylum within 72 hours of their arrival in the U.S. Rapid processing would include COVID-19 testing and criminal background checks.

The new policy marks a dramatic shift from Trump and Obama administration protocols where families could be detained for up to 21 days. The change is likely to spur even more arrivals of unaccompanied minors and migrant families this year, according to a senior Immigration and Customs Enforcement official.

Still in place, however, is a Trump administration policy that cites the coronavirus pandemic and public health as a reason to deport migrants attempting to enter the country at the border without due process.

Children attempting to cross the border by themselves had been the exception. They can only be detained by U.S. Customs and Border Protection for up to three days before another agency looks for a sponsor for the child while awaiting immigration proceedings.

Rising numbers at border

On March 1, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas sought to assure reporters that there was no crisis at the border, just “challenges that we are managing” with existing resources.

But the reality on the ground is quite different from the optimistic picture Mayorkas was painting.

The number of people attempting to cross the border has steadily increased since April 2020. U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials say worsening economic conditions in Central and South America, exacerbated by the pandemic and natural disasters, are some of the factors that lead people to make the dangerous trip.

Border Angels, the San Diego-based humanitarian organization, reports an increase of families from Mexico migrating north due to drug cartel activity. Central Americans, Haitians and people from African countries are also seeking asylum in the U.S.

Asylum-seekers who desire to enter the U.S. “need to wait. It takes time to rebuild the system from scratch,” Mayorkas said, telling reporters at a White House press briefing that under the Trump administration, the immigration system had been “gutted.”

In January 2021, CPB officers encountered close to 7,500 families attempting to cross into the U.S., compared to just over 4,700 in October 2020. The number of children and single adults arrested for crossing has also increased.

In late February, in the Rio Grande Valley sector of Texas, Chief Patrol Agent Brian Hastings posted on Twitter that more than 500 people, consisting mostly of families and unaccompanied children, tried to cross the border in a 24-hour period.

The level of border apprehensions is not unprecedented. Border Patrol reported apprehending more than 47,000 migrants along the U.S.-Mexico border for the month of January 2019. More than 44,000 were intercepted in January 2009.

‘Remain in Mexico’ asylum-seekers

The changes in U.S. immigration policy are being closely watched by another group of migrants who have been forced to stay in Mexico under Trump's Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP). This is also known as the "Remain in Mexico" policy, which allowed border patrol agents to return non-Mexican asylum-seekers to Mexico to wait for their cases to be reviewed and processed.

The rapid-fire changes in immigration policy under the new administration have been confusing to some of the MPP asylum-seekers. Dulce Garcia, executive director of Border Angels, which supports 15 shelters in Mexico for asylum-seekers waiting to have their cases heard in the U.S., says half of a shelter's residents recently set out to try their luck at the border.

“About a quarter came back after being rejected,” she said, “and the other quarter is what is really concerning to us, because we think that maybe they are trying (to cross the border) through the desert.”

U.S. officials have been working with humanitarian organizations to begin processing the approximately 25,000 people in the MPP program. Beginning February 19, the first group of 25 people who had been waiting in Mexico entered the U.S. in San Diego, California. Mayorkas said officials are increasing the number of ports that are processing asylum-seekers as well as the number of people being processed.

“From what we see, in what their policies suggest is a much more humane and protection-focused policy. This includes recognition of various forms of persecution, recognizing things such as gang violence and domestic violence,” said Ellen Beattie, senior director of program quality and innovation at the International Rescue Committee.

A task force is working on reuniting families separated under the Trump administration. If the families reunite in the U.S., the Biden administration is exploring lawful pathways for them to remain in the country.

Other than asylum-seekers

While agents are seeing an increase of families and unaccompanied children attempting to cross or being smuggled across the border, they also see more serious criminal activity.

Border patrol agents said a combination of a border wall, manpower and technology will help them to do their jobs.

In February alone, agents in the Texas Rio Grande Sector have uncovered hundreds of pounds of drugs, such as cocaine, as well as arrested convicted sex offenders trying to reenter the U.S.

Texas rancher Chloe Wilson has seen a “significant increase in traffic” in the area where she lives in Southwest Texas more than 100 kilometers from the U.S.-Mexico border, as well as on her family’s properties near the border.

“These are criminals that are hauling drugs, people and children. These are not good people that are coming across. They’re in full military fatigues and work boots. These people are prepared. It’s not just people seeking asylum. It’s men carrying cocaine and marijuana. We see them during the day and throughout the night,” said Wilson, who added she had witnessed mainly men with backpacks and guns.

She said criminal elements from south of the Texas border are not limited to the border areas but are traveling deep into Texas.

The right time

Mayra Flores, a U.S. citizen originally from Mexico, is the wife of a border patrol agent. She sees the increase in migrants trying to cross the border and fears for the border patrol agents as well as her community in South Texas.

She says the cartels profit from smuggling people across the border and endanger migrants trying to cross.

“Cameron County and Hidalgo County (Texas), we have one of the highest poverty rates in the United States … they don’t have the resources” to absorb the new migrants at a time when many places in the U.S. are still facing unemployment rates due to the coronavirus, Flores said.

“We need to decrease the COVID-19 situation here in South Texas,” said Flores, who has decided to run for U.S. Congress. “It’s putting our border patrol agents at risk, it’s putting everyone at risk. It’s putting our community at risk.”

Department of Homeland Security said asylum-seekers are being tested for COVID-19 before they are allowed to enter the U.S. However, news outlet Noticias Telemundo Investiga reported some migrants in Brownsville, Texas, who were planning to travel to other parts of the country, had tested positive for COVID-19 after being released by Border Patrol.

“No time is a good time for an asylum-seeker,” said Vino Pajanor, chief executive director of Catholic Charities Diocese of San Diego.


29 photos that show the US-Mexico border's evolution over 100 years

One of the Trump administration's latest immigration policies has come under fire, after Homeland Security figures revealed that ICE is separating families at the US-Mexico border.

Between May 5 and June 9, border officials separated more than 2,300 children from 2,206 parents, the DHS said Tuesday. The policy, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced in early May, enforces "zero-tolerance" regulations on those who enter the US without documentation. Any migrant who attempts to cross the southern border — even those seeking asylum — is now being prosecuted.

Following mounting pressure from both sides of the aisle, Trump signed an executive order that he said will stop family separation at the border. But the fate of immigrant children already in custody remains unclear, and the order still faces legal obstacles.

The goal of establishing a firm physical boundary to separate the US from Mexico is nothing new. In the country that has the world's largest immigrant population, American presidential administrations have tried tightening security along the border for around a century.

Though the divide was formally established in 1824, the US didn't launch its official Border Patrol until 1924. Inspection and holding stations were created after that, followed by the construction of miles of fences with barbed wire and steel barriers over the next few decades.


January 8, 2019: Trump makes case for border barrier in televised address Democratic leadership rejects request

In the televised address from the Oval Office on January 8, 2019, President Donald Trump said that there was a humanitarian and security crisis at the southern border, and he called on members of Congress to allocate $5.7 billion to build a wall or steel barrier to protect the nation. He said, “At the request of Democrats, it will be a steel barrier rather than a concrete wall. This barrier is absolutely critical to border security. It’s also what our professionals at the border want and need.” Ώ ]

In making his case for the barrier, Trump said that individuals who enter the country without legal permission from the southern border strain public resources and drive down jobs and wages. He also said that some drugs and criminals enter the country through the southern border, harming Americans. Ώ ]

In response to those, including Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who “have suggested a barrier is immoral,” Trump said, “Then why do wealthy politicians build walls, fences, and gates around their homes? They don’t build walls because they hate the people on the outside, but because they love the people on the inside. The only thing that is immoral is the politicians to do nothing and continue to allow more innocent people to be so horribly victimized.” Ώ ]

The address took place on the 18th day of a partial government shutdown. Trump said that he would not sign legislation to reopen the government if it did not include border funding.

Immediately after Trump’s speech, Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), issued a televised response rejecting Trump’s request for a border wall and calling on him to reopen the government. Pelosi said, “President Trump must stop holding the American people hostage, must stop manufacturing a crisis, and must reopen the government.” ΐ ]

Schumer said that Democrats supported border security measures, but “disagree with the president about the most effective way to do it.” Schumer also criticized Trump for creating a crisis that he said did not exist. Schumer said, “This president just used the backdrop of the Oval Office to manufacture a crisis, stoke fear, and divert attention from the turmoil in his administration.” ΐ ]

In his address, Trump did not declare a national emergency over border security, something he said that he was considering. “Federal law allows the president to halt military construction projects and divert those funds for the emergency,” according to Die Wall Street Journal. Democrats said that they would challenge Trump’s declaration in court if issued. ⎪] ⎫]


Thank you!

But, though the reasoning for ICE’s establishment had to do with terrorism, the philosophy behind it also represented a change in the U.S. government’s view of immigrants, says María Cristina García, a professor of history at Cornell University.

“Immigration matters were once handled by the Department of Commerce, then the Department of Labor,” García tells TIME. “Today it&rsquos the Department of Homeland Security.”

As García explains, knowing which department handles the matter “reveals a great deal about how a society views immigration.” If immigration is an economic or work-force issue, it would make sense to place it under the oversight of departments that deal with those issues. Placing immigration in the national security sector, however, reveals a changed focus on the idea of potential safety threats represented by immigrants, asylum seekers and refugees.

That shift didn’t start with the attacks of 2001. Immigration had been mixed in with national-security issues during the Clinton administration, too, especially after the first World Trade Center bombing on Feb. 26, 1993. García points out that, in subsequent years, Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA), which, experts say, was designed to curtail immigration from Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. Deportations increased after these 1996 policies ramped up security at the U.S.-Mexico border and the penalties for unauthorized entry into the U.S., but the rhetoric linking immigration and national security “really takes off after 9/11,” García says, and the establishment of ICE was part of that.

But some historians say that the effort to make Americans feel safer and help make the border-control system more efficient ended up creating other problems. One big issue is that some of the various agencies under the DHS umbrella had conflicting responsibilities &mdash a problem that García says is linked to today’s calls to eliminate or revamp the agency.

“You have within the Department of Homeland Security agencies that have contradictory missions,” García says. “You have, on the one hand, an agency entrusted with preventing another terrorist attack, then you have agencies that deal with refugees and that requires a humanitarian [approach]. Refugee advocates, in particular, doubt that the U.S. can honor its humanitarian obligations if the inclination is to automatically assume that refugees and asylum seekers are potential terrorists.”

Whether ICE will get a makeover or not, lawmakers have already taken some action in response to critics. While national politicians debate the issue, some cities nationwide have tried to extract themselves from the complicated workings of the agency. For example, Williamson County, Texas, commissioner Terry Cook &mdash whose county abolished their contracts with ICE to house detainees who are awaiting hearings &mdash told the New York Tye that the controversy over the ethics of working with the agency had become too big a distraction from day-to-day county business. &ldquoWe did not need,” she said, “to be in the middle of this.&rdquo


Style or substance? Kamala Harris' duties pile up as border crisis goes unresolved

Vice President Kamala Harris’ portfolio runneth over.

In just her first three months in office, Ms. Harris has amassed responsibility for controlling the porous southern border, directing U.S. competitiveness in outer space, extending broadband service back on Earth, selling the president’s multitrillion-dollar jobs bills, unionizing the U.S. workforce, coordinating relations with world leaders, advocating for the rights of women and girls, serving as a watchdog on social equity issues and preventing the planet from overheating.

That list probably omitted a few of the vice president’s ever-expanding duties. It’s early.

Republicans say it’s another sign that Ms. Harris and the liberal wing of the Democratic Party are calling the shots in the White House. Some outside observers say it’s doubtful that a vice president can effectively manage so many policy priorities effectively.

“I don’t think she can really handle that many responsibilities at one time, but I think there is a symbolic value in doing that,” said Sangay Mishra, an assistant political science professor at Drew University in New Jersey and an advisory board member of the Kamala Harris Project, a nonpartisan, nonprofit group of scholars examining her term in office.

Mr. Mishra said the administration wants Ms. Harris, the first female vice president and the first vice president of South Asian and Black heritage, to be in the forefront of many policy priorities for political impact.

“I do feel that the administration has come to rely on her, both for her expertise and her ability to deal with issues, but also for political reasons in the sense that the symbolism of her being there, and what she represents, and the constituents that she speaks to, is part of what is happening,” he said. “That’s the reason why you see so many assignments being given to her.”

Ms. Harris’ responsibility for the migrant crisis has drawn the most fire from Republicans. She has focused on diplomatic efforts with Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador while rebuffing calls to visit the border region to see the impact firsthand.

Rep. Madison Cawthorn, North Carolina Republican, mocked Ms. Harris’ assertion that a lack of “climate resilience” in Central American countries is partly responsible for the surge of illegal crossings of the U.S. border. “It probably has more to do with your radical open border policies, Kamala — nice try trying to shift the blame though,” Mr. Cawthorn tweeted. The conservative lawmaker introduced a “Donument” bill last month that would protect the southern border wall built by President Trump by creating a national monument to the barrier.

Mr. Biden told Congress that he delegated responsibility to Ms. Harris for the migration problem because “I have absolute confidence she will get the job done.”

In a virtual meeting with Ms. Harris on migration Friday, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador praised President Biden’s decision to delegate responsibility to his vice president.

“It is my hope that this will be a permanent and constant relationship between us,” Mr. Lopez Obrador told Ms. Harris through a translator. “I believe that this was a very positive, a very good decision, and we thank President Biden for naming you to lead all things related to migration. This is a topic, as I understand, that is very important to President Biden, as you have been appointed, as vice president, to lead all efforts regarding these issues.”

The administration announced recently that Ms. Harris will head the National Space Council, a traditional role for the vice president. The council oversees national security, technological development and commercial growth in space.

Senior administration officials said Ms. Harris will focus on “sustainable development” of space commerce, climate change, peaceful borders and responsible behaviors in space, plus STEM education and diversity in the workforce.

Asked how Ms. Harris’ work would differ from that of predecessor Mike Pence at the National Space Council, a Biden official said, “I think her approach to this is just going to be to get the job done, and use this to lead our space policy, and not really focus perhaps as much on big displays.”

A former senior Trump administration official who worked on space and border issues said the Biden team is mischaracterizing Mr. Pence’s contributions.

“Pence went down to two shuttle launches. If that’s a display, I think that that shows support, it conveys that space is a priority,” the former official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. “He went over to NASA for a Space Council meeting and celebrated the one-year anniversary of the Space Force. Those were important priorities for that administration. If somebody is being critical of ‘big displays,’ I’m not sure that they understand how to show that things are a priority to the American people. And by that logic, Biden or Harris not doing a big visit to the border would convey that it’s not a priority for them.”

The former Trump official said the Biden White House “certainly attempted to make a big deal about Harris leading the Space Council.”

“But that’s a role that’s traditionally filled by the vice president, so it shouldn’t have come as any surprise that that’s a responsibility she was going to take on,” the source said. “Juggling multiple priorities is definitely doable if you have the energy and focus on accomplishing those. I think that the key difference when Pence was given responsibilities in the Trump administration, he dove in head first. Harris hasn’t been to the border at all.”

The vice president’s office didn’t respond to questions about how she plans to effectively manage the broad range of policy priorities or whether she intends to hire more staff to help her.

It’s clear that Ms. Harris has become a foil for Republicans, who are fundraising off her name and warning voters about her far-left influence.

Upon hearing that Ms. Harris will be leading the National Space Council, Rep. Andy Biggs, Arizona Republican, tweeted, “Goodbye space programs.”

The Democratic-majority House Committee on Science, Space and Technology called Ms. Harris “an inspiration to young women across the nation” and said as chair of the Space Council, “she is a role model for the next generation of women” in science and math careers.

Mr. Mishra said Republicans are making what amounts to “a good political move” by saying Mr. Biden is delegating to Ms. Harris because he is not capable of handling all the responsibilities.

“Kamala Harris is associated with the more progressive left, the minority caucus, the abolish-the-police, that kind of crowd, which is now controlling the White House,” he said of the Republican view. “So it’s more of a political move than an actual reading of the situation.”


Inhoud

The United States Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787. Article I, section 8, clause 4 of the Constitution expressly gives the United States Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. [1]

Pursuant to this power, Congress in 1790 passed the first naturalization law for the United States, the Naturalization Act of 1790. The law enabled those who had resided in the country for two years and had kept their current state of residence for a year to apply for citizenship. However it restricted naturalization to "free white persons" of "good moral character".

The Naturalization Act of 1795 increased the residency requirement to five years residence and added a requirement to give a three years notice of intention to apply for citizenship, and the Naturalization Act of 1798 further increased the residency requirement to 14 years and required five years notice of intent to apply for citizenship.

The Naturalization Law of 1802 repealed and replaced the Naturalization Act of 1798.

The Fourteenth Amendment, based on the Civil Rights Act of 1866, was passed in 1868 to provide citizenship for former slaves. The 1866 Act read, "That all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States and such citizens, of every race and color, without regard to any previous condition of slavery or involuntary servitude" shall have the same rights "as is enjoyed by white citizens." The phrase in the Fourteenth Amendment reversed the conditional clause to read: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." This was applied by the Supreme Court in the 1898 case United States v. Wong Kim Ark to deal with the child of Chinese citizens who were legally resident in the U.S. at the time of his birth, with exceptions such as for the children of diplomats and American Indians. See the articles jus soli (birthplace) and jus sanguinis (bloodline) for further discussion.

In 1870, the law was broadened to allow blacks to be naturalized. [2] Asian immigrants were excluded from naturalization but not from living in the United States. There were also significant restrictions on some Asians at the state level in California, for example, non-citizen Asians were not allowed to own land.

The first federal statute restricting immigration was the Page Act, passed in 1875. It barred immigrants considered "undesirable," defining this as a person from East Asia who was coming to the United States to be a forced laborer, any East Asian woman who would engage in prostitution, and all people considered to be convicts in their own country. In practice, it resulted mainly in barring entry to Chinese women.

After the immigration of 123,000 Chinese in the 1870s, who joined the 105,000 who had immigrated between 1850 and 1870, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882 which limited further Chinese immigration. Chinese had immigrated to the Western United States as a result of unsettled conditions in China, the availability of jobs working on railroads, and the Gold Rush that was going on at that time in California. The expression "Yellow Peril" became popular at this time.

The act excluded Chinese laborers from immigrating to the United States for ten years and was the first immigration law passed by Congress. Laborers in the United States and laborers with work visas received a certificate of residency and were allowed to travel in and out of the United States. Amendments made in 1884 tightened the provisions that allowed previous immigrants to leave and return, and clarified that the law applied to ethnic Chinese regardless of their country of origin. The act was renewed in 1892 by the Geary Act for another ten years, and in 1902 with no terminal date. It was repealed in 1943, although large scale Chinese immigration did not occur until 1965. [ aanhaling nodig ]

The Empire of Japan's State Department negotiated the so-called Gentlemen's Agreement in 1907, a protocol where Japan agreed to stop issuing passports to its citizens who wanted to emigrate to the United States. In practice, the Japanese government compromised with its prospective emigrants and continued to give passports to the Territory of Hawaii where many Japanese resided. Once in Hawaii, it was easy for the Japanese to continue on to Japanese settlements on the west coast if they so desired. In the decade of 1901 to 1910, 129,000 Japanese immigrated to the continental United States or Hawaii nearly all were males and on five-year work contracts and 117,000 more came in the decades from 1911 to 1930. How many of them stayed and how many returned at the end of their contracts is unknown but it is estimated that about one-half returned. Again this immigrant flow was at least 80% male and the demand for female Japanese immigrants almost immediately arose. This need was met in part by what are called "postcard wives" who immigrated to new husbands who had chosen them on the basis of their pictures (similar marriages also occurred in nearly all cultures throughout the female-scarce west). The Japanese government finally quit issuing passports to the Territory of Hawaii for single women in the 1920s.

Congress also banned persons because of poor health or lack of education. An 1882 law banned entry of "lunatics" and infectious disease carriers. After President William McKinley was assassinated by an anarchist of immigrant parentage, Congress enacted the Anarchist Exclusion Act in 1903 to exclude known anarchist agitators. [3] A literacy requirement was added in the Immigration Act of 1917.

1920s Edit

In 1921 the United States Congress passed the Emergency Quota Act, which established national immigration quotas. The quotas were based on the number of foreign-born residents of each nationality who were living in the United States as of the 1910 census. [4]

The crucial 1923 Supreme Court case United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind created the official stance to classify South Asian Indians as non-white, which at the time allowed Indians who had already been naturalized to be retroactively stripped of their citizenship after prosecutors argued that they had gained their citizenship illegally. [5] The California Alien Land Law of 1913 (overturned in 1952 by the holding in Sei Fujii v. California, 38 Cal. 2d 718) and other similar laws prohibited aliens from owning land property, thus effectively stripping Indian Americans of land rights. The decision placated Asiatic Exclusion League demands and growing outrage at the so-called Turban Tide/Hindoo Invasion [sic] and "Yellow Peril". While more recent legislation influenced by the civil rights movement has removed much of the statutory discrimination against Asians, no case has overturned the classification of Indians as non-white.

A more complex quota plan, the National Origins Formula, replaced this "emergency" system under the Immigration Act of 1924 (Johnson-Reed Act), which set quotas on the number of immigrants from the Eastern Hemisphere, and effectively banned all immigration from Asia. [6] [7] The reference census used was changed to that of 1890, [7] which greatly reduced the number of Southern and Eastern European immigrants. An annual ceiling of 154,227 was set for the Eastern Hemisphere.

A 1929 act added provisions for prior deportees, who, 60 days after the act took effect, would be convicted of a felony whether their deportation occurred before or after the law was enacted. [8]

1930s–50s Edit

In 1932 President Hoover and the State Department essentially shut down immigration during the Great Depression as immigration went from 236,000 in 1929 to 23,000 in 1933. This was accompanied by voluntary repatriation to Europe and Mexico, and coerced repatriation and deportation of between 500,000 and 2 million Mexican Americans, mostly citizens, in the Mexican Repatriation. Total immigration in the decade of 1931 to 1940 was 528,000 averaging less than 53,000 a year.

The Chinese exclusion laws were repealed in 1943. The Luce–Celler Act of 1946 ended discrimination against Indian Americans and Filipinos, who were accorded the right to naturalization, and allowed a quota of 100 immigrants per year.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (the McCarran-Walter Act) revised the quotas again, basing them on the 1920 census. For the first time in American history, racial distinctions were omitted from the U.S. Code. As could be expected, most of the quota allocation went to immigrants from Ireland, the United Kingdom and Germany who already had relatives in the United States. [ aanhaling nodig ] The anti-subversive features of this law are still in force. [ aanhaling nodig ]

1960s Edit

The Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1965 (the Hart-Celler Act) abolished the system of national-origin quotas. There was, for the first time, a limitation on Western Hemisphere immigration (120,000 per year), with the Eastern Hemisphere limited to 170,000. The law changed the preference system for immigrants. Specifically, the law provided preference to immigrants with skills needed in the U.S. workforce, refugees and asylum seekers, as well as family members of U.S. citizens. Family reunification became the cornerstone of the bill. At the time, the then-chairman of the Senate Immigration Subcommittee Edward Kennedy remarked that "the bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs." (U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C., Feb. 10, 1965. pp. 1–3.)

1980s Edit

The Refugee Act of 1980 established policies for refugees, redefining "refugee" according to United Nations norms. A target for refugees was set at 50,000 and the worldwide ceiling for immigrants was reduced to 270,000 annually.

In 1986, the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) was passed, creating for the first time penalties for employers who knowingly hired undocumented immigrants. IRCA also contained an amnesty for about 3 million undocumented immigrants already in the United States, and mandated the intensification of some of the activities of the United States Border Patrol or INS (now part of Department of Homeland Security).

1990s Edit

The U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform, led by former Rep. Barbara Jordan, ran from 1990 to 1997. The Commission covered many facets of immigration policy, but started from the perception that the "credibility of immigration policy can be measured by a simple yardstick: people who should get in, do get in people who should not get in, are kept out and people who are judged deportable are required to leave". [9] From there, in a series of four reports, the commission looked at all aspects of immigration policy. [10] In the first, it found that enforcement was lax and needed improvement on the border and internally. For internal enforcement, it recommended that an automated employment verification system be created to enable employers to distinguish between legal and illegal workers. The second report discussed legal immigration issues and suggested that immediate family members and skilled workers receive priority. The third report covered refugee and asylum issues. Finally, the fourth report reiterated the major points of the previous reports and the need for a new immigration policy. Few of these suggestions were implemented.

The Immigration Act of 1990 (IMMACT) modified and expanded the 1965 act it significantly increased the total immigration limit to 700,000 and increased visas by 40 percent. Family reunification was retained as the main immigration criterion, with significant increases in employment-related immigration.

Several pieces of legislation signed into law in 1996 marked a turn towards harsher policies for both legal and illegal immigrants. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) and Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) vastly increased the categories of criminal activity for which immigrants, including green card holders, can be deported and imposed mandatory detention for certain types of deportation cases. As a result, well over 2 million individuals have been deported since 1996. [11]

The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 affected American perspectives on many issues, including immigration. A total of 20 foreign terrorists were involved, 19 of whom took part in the attacks that caused the deaths of 2,977 victims, most of them civilians. The terrorists had entered the United States on tourist or student visas. Four of them, however, had violated the terms of their visas. The attack exposed long-standing weaknesses in the U.S. immigration system that included failures in the areas of visa processing, internal enforcement, and information sharing. [12]

The REAL ID Act of 2005 changed some visa limits, tightened restrictions on asylum applications and made it easier to exclude suspected terrorists, and removed restrictions on building border fences.

In 2005, Senators John McCain and Ted Kennedy revived the discussion of comprehensive immigration reform with the proposal of the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act, incorporating legalization, guest worker programs, and enhanced border security. The bill was never voted on in the Senate, but portions are incorporated in later Senate proposals.

In 2006, the House of Representatives and the Senate produced their own, conflicting bills. In December 2005, the House passed the Border Protection, Anti-terrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005, which was sponsored by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI). The act was limited to enforcement and focused on both the border and the interior. In the Senate, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (CIRA) was sponsored by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) and passed in May 2006. CIRA would have given a path to eventual citizenship to a majority of undocumented immigrants already in the country as well as dramatically increased legal immigration. Although the bills passed their respective chambers, no compromise bill emerged. [13]

In 2007, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 was discussed in the Senate, which would have given a path to eventual citizenship to a large majority of illegal entrants in the country, significantly increased legal immigration and increased enforcement. The bill failed to pass a cloture vote, essentially killing it. [14]

Individual components of various reform packages have been separately introduced and pursued in the Congress. The DREAM Act is a bill initially introduced in 2001, incorporated in the various comprehensive reform bills, and then separately reintroduced in 2009 and 2010. The bill would provide legal residency and a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who graduate from U.S. high schools and attend college or join the military.

Immigrant visa limits set by Congress remain at 700,000 for the combined categories of employment, family preference, and family immediate. There are additional provisions for diversity and a small number of special visas. In 2008 immigration in these categories totaled slightly less than 750,000 and similar totals (representing maximums allowed by Congress) have been tallied in recent years. [15]

Naturalization numbers have ranged from about 500,000 to just over 1,000,000 per year since the early 1990s, with peak years in 1996 and 2008 each around 1,040,000. These numbers add up to more than the number of visas issued in those years because as many as 2.7 million of those who were granted amnesty by IRCA in 1986 have converted or will convert to citizenship. [16] In general, immigrants become eligible for citizenship after five years of residence. Many do not immediately apply, or do not pass the test on the first attempt. This means that the counts for visas and the counts for naturalization will always remain out of step, though in the long run the naturalizations add up to somewhat less than the visas.

These numbers are separate from illegal immigration, which peaked at probably over 1 million per year around the year 2000 and has probably declined to about 500,000 per year by 2009, which seems comparable or perhaps less than the outflow returning to their native countries. [17] Some of the legal immigrant categories may include former illegal immigrants who have come current on legal applications and passed background checks these individuals are included in the count of legal visas, not as a separate or additional number.

For Mexico and the Philippines, the only categories of immigrant visa available in practice are those for immediate dependent family of U.S. citizens. Persons who applied since 1994 have not been in the categories for adult children and siblings, and trends show that these data are unlikely to change. In fact, the trend has recently been moving in the opposite direction. Immigrant work visas run about 6 to 8 years behind current. [ verduideliking nodig ] [ aanhaling nodig ] While the government does not publish data on the number of pending applications, the evidence is that the backlog in those categories dwarfs the yearly quotas.

Legal immigration visas should not be confused with temporary work permits. Permits for seasonal labor (about 285,000 in 2008) or students (about 917,000 in 2008) [18] generally do not permit conversion to immigrant status. Even those who are legally authorized to work temporarily in the United States (such as H1-B workers) must apply for permanent residence separately, and gain no advantage from their temporary employment authorization. This is unlike many other countries, whose laws provide for permanent residence after a certain number of years of legal employment. Temporary workers, therefore, do not form a distinctly counted source of immigration. [19]

Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act 2010 (Arizona SB 1070) Edit

Under Arizona SB 1070, passed in 2010, it is a state misdemeanor for immigrants not to carry their immigration documents on their person while in Arizona, and people who are stopped or arrested by state police for any reason may be subject to verification of their immigration status. Arizona state or local officials and agencies cannot restrict enforcement of federal immigration laws. Anyone sheltering, hiring or transporting an undocumented immigrant is subject to penalty.

Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act 2013 (S.744) Edit

On April 17, 2013, the so-called "Gang of Eight" in the United States Senate introduced S.744, the long-awaited Senate version of the immigration reform bill proposed in Congress. [20] Text of the proposed legislation was promptly released on the website of Senator Charles Schumer. On June 27, 2013, the Senate passed the bill on 68-32 margin. The bill has not been taken up by the United States House of Representatives. [21]

Executive actions Edit

On November 21, 2014, president Barack Obama signed two executive actions which had the effect of delaying deportation for millions of illegal immigrants. The orders apply to parents of United States citizens (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans) and young people brought into the country illegally (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals). [22]