Border Enforcement
Migration at the border is a multifaceted issue, challenging the U.S. to secure our borders while upholding the human rights of individuals seeking safety and better opportunities. Balancing national security with compassion and our legal obligations to asylum seekers presents intricate dilemmas, and we collaborate with policymakers to advance bipartisan, action-oriented solutions.
Beyond A Border Solution
- Asylum
- May 3, 2023
America needs durable solutions. These concrete measures can bring orderliness to our border and modernize our overwhelmed asylum system. Read…
Read More
Groups Seek Information on CBP’s “Translation” Activities in Northern Border States
Washington, D.C. – Last week an alliance of immigration advocacy groups represented by the Legal Action Center filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The FOIA requests seek information regarding CBP policies on providing translation assistance to other law enforcement agencies and on… Read More
How Should Obama Administration Proceed with Deferred Action Program?
In a June 15th memo announcing deferred action for immigrant youth, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano gave USCIS 60 days to come up with a process that will allow these young people to affirmatively apply for the chance to work, study, and live in the U.S. without fear of deportation. To be sure, USCIS staff and their counterparts at ICE, CBP, and DHS, have been entrusted with a difficult job—one that requires balancing legal and practical implementation issues against high expectations and years of built up frustration over the lack of immigration reform. But the real challenge is acknowledging that every single decision they make about the program has the chance to make it harder or easier for young people to realize their dreams. Read More
How the President’s Deferred Action Initiative Will Help the U.S. Economy
President Obama’s June 15 “deferred action” announcement is good not only for the 1.4 million unauthorized children and young adults who have been granted a temporary reprieve from deportation, but also good for the U.S. economy. Each year, tens of thousands of unauthorized students graduate from primary or secondary school, often at the top of their classes. They have the drive and intelligence to become doctors, nurses, teachers, and entrepreneurs, but their lack of legal status has prevented them from attending college or working legally. The President’s deferred action initiative has finally provided them with an opportunity to live up to their full potential and, in the process, earn more, spend more, and pay more in taxes. Read More
Clearing the Air on Immigrants, the Military, and Deferred Action
President Obama’s June 15 announcement on deferred action for DREAMers raised a number of questions about what it means and how it will be administered. One of the biggest questions is regarding military service. According to the DHS memo, among those eligible to be granted deferred action are an individual who is an “honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States.” Then, during his speech to NALEO, GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney stated that he would support a path to legal residency for “those who have risked their lives in defense of America.” The language of the DHS memo compounded by Romney’s remarks led some to believe that undocumented immigrants could serve in the military and therefore qualify for deferred action or some sort of legalization program. But this is not the case. Read More
DHS’s NSEERS Program, While Inactive, Continues to Discriminate
For a long time after 9/11, immigration reform was only discussed as a national security issue, and many policies were put in place aimed at stopping terrorists from entering the country. Unfortunately, some of these policies—such as the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS) program—targeted particular ethnic groups, promoted profiling, and resulted in discrimination and civil rights violations. In recent years, the Obama administration has made efforts to end the NSEERS program, but NSEERS still exists and the impact of these policies is still being felt in immigrant communities. In fact, the Rights Working Group, a coalition of civil rights organizations, recently released a report, The NSEERS Effect: A Decade of Racial Profiling, Fear, and Secrecy, which analyzes the continuing impact of this post-9/11 policy. Read More
In Arizona Case, Supreme Court Affirms Legality of Prosecutorial Discretion
The Supreme Court dealt a blow to the restrictionist movement on Monday by striking down three provisions of Arizona SB 1070 and leaving a fourth vulnerable to future challenge. But in a lesser noticed development, the Court also undercut the arguments of critics who contend the President violated the Constitution by recently directing his administration not to deport otherwise removable immigrants who were brought to the country as children. As the majority opinion confirmed—and not even Justice Scalia denied—the President’s authority to set enforcement priorities is a valid and important aspect of the immigration system. Read More
DHS Rescinds Part of Controversial 287(g) Program in Arizona
The Obama administration suspended part of its controversial 287(g) program in Arizona this week following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Arizona v. United States. DHS announced that it was ending its “287(g) task force agreements” in Arizona —agreements which deputize certain local police to enforce immigration laws. Other state immigration programs, however, like Secure Communities and the 287(g) jail agreements (which allow deputized arresting officers to enforce immigration laws in jails), will remain in effect. Read More
Does the Supreme Court Think Most Immigrants are Criminals?
Even as the Supreme Court struck down three provisions of Arizona’s anti-immigrant law (SB 1070), the Justices appeared to embrace a major falsehood of nativist ideology: that immigrants are more likely to be criminals than the native-born. On page six of the majority opinion, the Court maintains that unauthorized immigrants are “reported to be responsible for a disproportionate share of serious crime” in Arizona’s Maricopa County. The source cited for this bold statement is a 2009 report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS)—a deeply flawed report which attempts to overturn a century’s worth of research demonstrating that immigrants are less likely than the native-born to commit violent crimes or end up behind bars. Read More
Supreme Court Issues Mixed Decision on Arizona SB 1070
The Supreme Court issued a mixed ruling on Monday in the Obama administration’s challenge to Arizona SB 1070. By a 5-3 margin, the Justices upheld the injunction against provisions of the law that authorize police to arrest immigrants suspected of committing removable offenses (Section 6), and that impose penalties under state law for immigrants who fail to carry “registration” papers (Section 3) or attempt to work without federal authorization (Section 5). Although the Court allowed the implementation of the provision of SB 1070 requiring police to determine the immigration status of people in custody “reasonable suspicion” exists that they are in the country unlawfully (Section 2(B)), it left open the door to future legal challenges. Read More
Lawsuit Against DHS for Failure to Disclose Records on “Voluntary” Returns
In June 2012, the American Immigration Council, in collaboration with Hughes Socol Piers Resnick & Dym, filed suit against DHS and CBP for unlawfully withholding records concerning voluntary returns of noncitizens from the United States to their countries of origin. Voluntary return, also known as “administrative voluntary departure,” is a procedure whereby CBP officers permit noncitizens to voluntarily depart the United States at their own expense rather than undergoing formal removal proceedings. Noncitizens may be granted voluntary return to their countries of origin after conceding unlawful presence in the United States and knowingly and voluntarily waiving the right to contest removal. Read More
Make a contribution
Make a direct impact on the lives of immigrants.
