From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A warning sign at the international boundary between the United States and Canada in Point Roberts, Washington.

Illegal immigration to the United States refers to the act of foreign nationals violating U.S. immigration policies and national laws by immigrating to the United States without proper consent from the United States government.^[1]

The illegal immigrant population of the United States is estimated to be about 12 million people.^[2] According to a Pew Hispanic Center report, fifty-seven percent of undocumented immigrants are from Mexico, twenty-four percent are from other Latin American countries, primarily from Central America^[3], nine percent are from Asia, six percent from Europe and Canada, and four percent from the rest of the world.^[3]

[edit] Terminology

[edit] Legal definitions

Immigration law has a number of highly technical terms that may not mean the same thing to the average reader.^[4] An alien, as defined by the Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the State Department, is any person who is neither a citizen or a national of the United States.^[5][6][7] An immigrant is a “permanent resident alien“, which in turn is by various definitions either an alien admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident (according to the US CIS), or any alien in the United States^[8] who is not in a class of “nonimmigrant alien” such as diplomats, students within the United States to attend school, athletes attending athletic events, ship and aircraft crew members, and others in the United States on a temporary basis (according to the Immigration and Nationality Act).

[edit] Journalism

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”.^[9] According to a weekly analysis of American English from Voice of America, the official international radio and television broadcasting service of the United States federal government, “The most common term by far, though, at least as reflected in the news media, is illegal immigrants” in reference to people who are in the United States without following immigration laws.^[10]

As an example of newspaper policy, the Seattle Times avoids referring to illegal aliens, but uses the terms illegal immigration, illegal immigrant, and sometimes undocumented, explaining that in their use, “Illegal does not mean criminal, it simply means unlawful, not authorized or sanctioned, against the rules”.^[11]

At the 1994 Unity convention, the four minority journalism groups – the National Association of Black Journalists, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists , the Asian American Journalists Association and the Native American Journalists Association – issued a joint statement on the term illegal aliens: “Except in direct quotations, do not use the phrase illegal alien or the word alien, in copy or in headlines, to refer to citizens of a foreign country who have come to the U.S. with no documents to show that they are legally entitled to visit, work or live here. Such terms are considered pejorative not only by those to whom they are applied but by many people of the same ethnic and national backgrounds who are in the U.S. legally.”^[12][13] Press releases from these minority journalism groups in 2006 reaffirmed this position and recommended using “undocumented immigrant” and avoid the term “illegal” as a label.^[12][13][14]

[edit] Profile and demographics

Main article: Illegal immigrant population of the United States

There are many characteristics shared among illegal immigrants living in the United States. A trend growing steadily since the 1990s, illegal immigrants continue to outpace the number of legal immigrants Illegal immigrants continue to outpace the number of legal immigrants — a trend that has held steady since the 1990s. While the majority of undocumented immigrants continue to concentrate in places with existing large communities of Hispanics, they are also increasingly settling throughout the rest of the country.^[15]

Statistically, an estimated 13.9 million people live in families in which the head of household or the spouse is an unauthorized immigrant.^[15] Illegal immigrants arriving in recent years tend to have more education than those who have been in the country a decade or more. A quarter of all immigrants who have arrived in recent years have at least some college education. Nonetheless, undocumented immigrants as a group are less educated than other sections of the U.S. population: 49 percent haven’t completed high school, compared with 9 percent of native-born Americans and 25 percent of legal immigrants.^[15]

In addition, Illegal immigrants can be found working in many sectors of the U.S. economy. According to National Public Radio, about 3 percent work in agriculture; 33 percent have jobs in service industries; and substantial numbers can be found in construction and related occupations (16 percent) and in production, installation and repair (17 percent).^[15] According to USA Today, about 4 percent work in farming; 21 percent have jobs in service industries; and substantial numbers can be found in construction and related occupations (19 percent) and in production, installation and repair (15 percent), with 12% in sales, 10% in management, and 8% in transportation.^[16] Illegal immigrants have lower incomes than both legal immigrants and native-born Americans, but earnings do increase somewhat the longer an individual is in the country.^[15]

A common bond that unites illegal immigrants is that they are “sojourners: they come to the United States for several years but eventually return to their home country.”^[17]

[edit] Breakdown by state

As of 2006^[18], the following data table shows a spread of distribution of locations where illegal immigrants reside by state:

[edit] Present-day countries of origin

In March 2006 the Pew Hispanic Center (PHC) estimated the undocumented population ranged from 11.5 to 12 million individuals^[19], a number supported by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO)^[20]. Of these 12 million, 57% of undocumented immigrants originate from Mexico, 24% are from other Latin American countries, 9% originate stem from various parts of Asia, 6% come from Europe and Canada, and 4% from the other parts of the world.^[3]

According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security^[21], the countries of origin for the largest numbers of illegal immigrants are as follows:

For 2005

For 2006:^[22]

Furthermore, The Urban Institute, a respected Washington, D.C. based nonpartisan research group that collects data and conducts policy research issues, estimates “between 65,000 and 75,000 undocumented Canadians currently live in the United States.”^[23]

[edit] Becoming illegal immigrants

People become illegal immigrants in one of three ways: entering without authorization or inspection, staying beyond the authorized period after legal entry, or by violating the terms of legal entry.^[24] Their mode of violation breaks down as follows: If the suspect entered legally without inspection, then the suspect would be classified as either a “Non-Immigrant Visa Overstayer” (4 to 5.5 million) or a “Border Crossing Card Violator” (250,000 to 500,000). If the suspect entered illegally without inspection, then the suspect is classified as a “Evaded the Immigration Inspectors and Border Patrol” (6 to 7 million).^[25]

[edit] Illegal entry

Main article: Illegal entry#United States

There are an estimated half a million illegal entries into the United States each year.^[26] 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 into California.^{[citation needed][26]}

A common means of border crossing is through the hiring of “coyotes,” people-smugglers who transport illegal immigrants in return for pay.^[27]

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. ^[28]

[edit] Visa overstay

A traveler is considered a “visa overstay” once he or she remains in the United States after the time of admission has expired. The time of admission varies greatly from traveler to traveler depending on what visa class into which they were admitted. Visa overstays tend to be somewhat more educated and better off financially than those who crossed the border illegally.^[29]

To help track visa overstayer the US-VISIT (United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology) 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.

Visa overstays mostly enter with tourist or business visas.^[30]

In the year 1994, more than half^[31] of illegal immigrants were Visa overstayers whereas in 2006, about 45%^[32] of illegal immigrants were Visa overstayers.

[edit] Violating terms

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page. (August 2008)

People have long used sham marriages as a way to fraudulently gain legal residency and eventual citizenship in the United States.^[33][34] One of the most prominent cases was that of Nada Nadim Prouty, a Lebanese immigrant who gained entry into the US as a student, but then married fraudulently to stay in the country, and even became a US citizen and went on to become an employee of the FBI and the CIA, before pleading guilty to conspiracy.^[35][36]

[edit] Causes

Main article: Illegal immigration#causes

[edit] Economic incentives

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page. (August 2008)

The continuing practice of hiring unauthorized workers has been referred to as “the magnet for illegal immigration.” ^[37] According to National Public Radio (NPR), 5% of the labor force in the United States is composed of unauthorized, illegal immigrants.[15] Because a significant percentage of employers are willing to hire illegal immigrants for higher pay than they would typically receive in their former country, illegal immigrants have prime motivation to cross borders. The economic incentives that drive illegal immigration benefit both the undocumented workers whose desire to work and live in the United States and the employers who want flexible, low-cost labor.^[38] Many of the illegal immigrants desire the higher pay to be able to support their families that may or may not have illegally immigrated to the U.S.

According to the World Bank, Mexico is classified as a middle-income country^[39] but the wealth is centralized in the hands of a minority. It had a gross domestic product (in terms of PPP) of more than US$1.3 trillion in 2007,^[40] and more billionaires than Switzerland^[41] (including Carlos Slim whom Time Magazine^[42][43], ABC News, ^[44] and CNN Money ^[45] claim is the world’s richest man and who owns 8% of the country’s GDP^[41]). Yet according to the World Bank 17.6% of Mexico’s population lives in “extreme” poverty, while 30.1% live in “moderated” poverty, for a total of 47.7%.^[46] In addition, the average annual income for a worker in Mexico is around USD$2,000. However, the poorest 40% of the population receive only about USD$550 annually and often fail to be able to afford adequate necessities. The large disparity between the upper income class and the lower income class is a key factor in the overall majority of workers in Mexico being poor and having to resort to illegal acts to improve living situations.^[47]

In 2003, then-President of Mexico, Vicente Fox stated that remittances “are our biggest source of foreign income, bigger than oil, tourism or foreign investment” and that “the money transfers grew after Mexican consulates started giving identity cards to their citizens in the United States.” He stated that money sent from Mexican workers in the United States to their families back home reached a record $12 billion.^[48]. Two years later, in 2005, the World Bank stated that Mexico was receiving $18.1 billion in remittances and that it ranked third (behind only India and China) among the countries receiving the greatest amount of remittances.^[49]

[edit] Family reunification

Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page. (August 2008)

According to demographer Jeffery Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center, the flow of Mexicans to the U. S. has produced a “network effect” - furthering immigration as Mexicans moved to join relatives already in the U.S.^[50] The Pew Hispanic Center describes that the recent dramatic increase in the population of illegal immigrants has sparked more illegal immigrants to cross borders. Once the extended families of illegal immigrants cross national borders, they create a “network effect” by building large communities.^[50]

The Lesbian and Gay Immigration Rights Task Force (LGIRTF), a ten year organization benefiting the union of illegal immigrant same-sex couples fighting to stay in the country, that marriage rates of binational same sex couples may increase the prospect of becoming undocumented, rather than decreasing it.^[51]

[edit] US Government inefficiencies

The waiting time to get a Permanent Resident Card from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services was in 2007 almost three years with each applicant spending an average of 45 hours in US government lines, inefficiencies that encourage illegal immigration.^[52] According to Ramah McKay of the Migration Policy Institute, many analysts believe that the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. could be reduced significantly by alleviating the backlog by processing increased numbers of applicants each year and raising the cap on the first and second preference categories for family reunification.^[53]

[edit] Restrictive immigration laws

Harry Binswanger argues in Capitalism Magazine that the cause for illegal immigration is the “rights-defying anti-immigration laws”, and that the solution is to repeal the laws and legalize immigration.^[54]

[edit] Trade agreements and government failures

The Rockridge Institute asks, “What role have international trade agreements had in creating or exacerbating people’s urge to flee their homelands? If capital is going to freely cross borders, should people and labor be able to do so as well, going where globalization takes the jobs?… Such a framing of the problem would lead to a solution involving the Secretary of State, conversations with Mexico and other Central American countries, and a close examination of the promises of North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank to raise standards of living around the globe.^[55]

The Mexican government failed to follow through on promises to the United States to invest billions of dollars in roads, schooling, sanitation, housing, and other infrastructure to accommodate new “maquiladoras” (border factories) that had been envisioned as a way to reduce illegal immigration as a part of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).^[50] As a result few were built, and China was able to out-compete Mexico for manufacturing goods for the United States market.^[50] Rather than increasing as planned, the number of manufacturing workers in Mexico dropped from 4.1 million in 2000 to 3.5 million in 2004.^[50] Also, price pressure from more efficient United States corn producers and the elimination of tariffs under NAFTA^[56] caused the price of maize to fall 70% in Mexico between 1994 and 2001, and the number of farm jobs to decrease from 8.1 million in 1993 to 6.8 million in 2002.^[57]

Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, a survey of international businessmen that ranks countries from least to most corrupt, ranks Mexico at 72nd place out of 179 countries^[58]. (The Index ranks the U.S. in the 20th place. Lower ranking indicates less corruption.) According to Global Integrity’s 2006 Mexico Country Report, corruption costs the Mexican economy as much as $60 billion per year^[59]. A survey by the Center for the Study of Private Sector Economics (Centro de Estudios Económicos del Sector Privado), a Mexican research firm, estimates that 79 percent of companies in Mexico believe “illegal transactions” are a serious obstacle to business development^[60], . The 1994 economic crisis in Mexico associated with rampant government corruption ^[61] resulted in a greatly decreased U.S. dollar value of Mexican wages relative to U.S. production workers^{[62][63][64][50]}.

There may be many reasons for this endemic capital flight from Latin America. Political and economic instability should not be overlooked as a driving force. As post-Simon Bolivar dictatorships lost power to democratic systems throughout the 1930s-40s, and labor and civil rights movements gained power in parallel with the US, the US government did view democratically chosen emerging mixed free-market, collective and nationalized economic politics in these countries with suspicion. The US government saw these mixed economic solutions as the rise of ’socialism’ or ‘communism’ and a fundamental threat to the US form of Neo-Liberal Capitalism espoused by multi-lateral institutions (i.e. World Bank, IMF) for which the US was the principal sponsor. The US had just waged its own culture war during the McCarthy era against its own citizens who worked through democratic channels to support the labor movement, and other kinds of mixed-economy policies which were suppressed by official government initiatives including breach of constitutionally protected first amendment rights. During this time period, the US did clandestinely intervene through the CIA to support coup d’etats against democratically elected governments which led to significant destabilization in local economies lasting for decades. This instability contributed to the need for wealthy people to move capital out as well as emigrate causing brain drain in favor of the US, whose economy eagerly accepted this investment and human capital to create industry and jobs in the Continental US. ^[65]

All of these capital flows to the US represent lost opportunity costs for investment in industry throughout Latin America that could employ unskilled workers today. They also represent brain drain which could have led to development of higher order industries in these countries around universities in technology and service sectors, which largely occurred in the US economy instead using the same financial and human capital transfers. They may also reflect why politicians such as Hugo Chavez can be democratically elected and enjoy such wholesale mass support from 75% of the population who live below poverty level at least long enough to get him his term-limit extensions and other dictatorial powers which he enjoys today.^[66] The society suffered significant under-investment in social, human and industrial capital since the oil shocks of the 1970s changed direction for that economy, and never had compulsory universal education even before the capital flight began until the 1950s.^[67]

[edit] Facilitation by foreign governments

There it has been some accusations from U.S. groups that the Mexican government is collaborating to make illegal immigration to the United States easier:

• It plans to produce 70,000 maps marking main roads and water tanks for people wanting to cross illegally into the US. According to Mauricio Farah of Mexico’s Human Rights Commission, “The only thing we are trying to do is warn them of the risks they face and where to get water, so they don’t die,” But Russ Knocke, a spokesman for US Homeland Security said maps would not improve safety for those trying to cross the border, “It is not helpful for anyone, no matter how well intended they might be, to produce road maps that lead aliens into the desolate and dangerous areas along the border, and potentially invite criminal activity, human exploitation and personal risk,”^[68]“In response to the growing concern over these immigrant deaths, the INS [Immigrantion and Naturalization Service] launched “Operation Lifesaver” …using patrol flights and search-and-rescue missions to find migrants in distress.”^[69]

• The Yucatan government (a state of Mexico) also produces educational materials (a handbook and DVD) about the risks and implications of crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. According to some groups, this guide tells immigrants where to find health care, how to get their kids into U.S. schools and how to send money home. Sara Zapata Mijares of the Los Angeles Yacatecan Club and officials in Yucatan say illegal immigration is a reality and the guide is a necessity to save lives. Ira Mehlman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform says, “This is really the way they keep their corrupt system afloat, by sending their excess workers to the United States and getting billions of dollars in remittances every year … so for them this is a worthwhile investment”.^[70]

• The Mexican government distributes a comic book which warns illegal immigrants about illegal passing across the border. ^[71] That comic book recommends to illegal immigrants, once they’ve safely crossed the border, “Don’t call attention to yourself. … Avoid loud parties. … Don’t become involved in fights.” The Mexican government defends the guide as an attempt to save lives. “It’s kind of like illegal immigration for dummies,” said the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, Mark Krikorian. “Promoting safe illegal immigration is not the same as arguing against it.” However, on the last page of the comic book, it is clearly stated the Mexican government doesn’t promote illegal crossing at all and only encourage visits to the U.S. with all required documentation.

• Matrícula Consular identification cards. The Matrícula Consular (”Consular Registration”) is an identification card issued by the Government of Mexico through its consulate offices. The purpose of the card is to demonstrate that the bearer is a Mexican national living outside of Mexico. Similar consular identification cards are issued to citizens of Colombia, El Salvador, and Honduras.^[72] The document is accepted at financial institutions in many states and, in conjunction with an IRS Taxpayer Identification Number, allows illegal immigrants to open checking and saving accounts.^[73]

[edit] Legal issues

[edit] Immigration laws

Main article: United States nationality law

Main article: List of United States immigration laws

Immigrants are classified as illegal for one of three reasons: entering without authorization or inspection, staying beyond the authorized period after legal entry, or violating the terms of legal entry.^[74]

[edit] Prevention

Main article: United States–Mexico barrier

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.^{[citation needed]} 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.^[75] The expense for illegal immigrants has also increased, encouraging them to stay longer to recoup the cost.^[75]

In October 2008, Mexico agreed to deport Cubans using the country as an entry point to the US. Cuban Foreign Minister said the Cuban-Mexican agreement would lead to “the immense majority of Cubans being repatriated.”^[76]

[edit] Apprehension

US ICE, USBP, and CBP enforce the INA, and to some extent the United States military, local law enforcement and other local agencies, and private citizens and citizen groups guard the border. The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). USCIS is not an enforcement agency. They do not enforce the Immigration and Nationality Act. They are a service oriented agency only.

[edit] At border

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection is responsible for apprehending individuals attempting illegal entry to the United States. The United States Border Patrol is its mobile uniformed law enforcement arm, responsible for deterrence, detection and apprehension of those who enter the United States without authorization from the government and outside the designated ports of entry.

In December 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to build a separation barrier along parts of the border not already protected by separation barriers. A later vote in the United States Senate on May 17, 2006, included a plan to blockade 860 miles (1,380 km) of the border with vehicle barriers and triple-layer fencing along with granting an “earned path to citizenship” to the 12 million illegal aliens in the U.S. and roughly doubling legal immigration (from their 1970s levels)^{[citation needed]} . In 2007 Congress approved a plan calling for more fencing along the Mexican border, with funds for approximately 700 miles (1,100 km) of new fencing.^{[citation needed]}

“If immigrants, whether legal or illegal, are apprehended entering the US while committing a crime, they are usually charged under federal statutes and, if convicted, are sent to federal prisons.” ^[77]

[edit] At workplace

For decades, immigration authorities have alerted (”no-match-letters”)^[78] employers of mismatches between reported employees’ Social Security cards and the actual names of the card holders. On September 1, a federal judge halted this practice of alerting employers of card mismatches.^[79]

Illegal hiring has not been prosecuted aggressively in recent years: between 1999 and 2003, according to the Washington Post, “work-site enforcement operations were scaled back 95 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. ^[80] Major employers of illegal immigrants have included:

• Wal-Mart. In 2005 Wal-Mart agreed to pay $11 million to settle a federal investigation that found hundreds of illegal immigrants were hired by Wal-Mart’s cleaning contractors.^[81]

• Swift & Co.. In December 2006, in the largest such crackdown in American history, U.S. federal immigration authorities raided Swift & Co. meat-processing plants in six U.S. states, arresting about 1,300 illegal immigrant employees. ^[82]

• Tyson Foods. This company has also been accused of actively importing illegal labor for its chicken packing plants; However, the jury acquitted the company after evidence was presented that Tyson went beyond mandated government requirements in demanding documentation for its employees. ^[83]

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.

[edit] Detention

Main article: Immigration detention#United States

About 40% of illegal immigrants enter legally and then overstay.^[17] About 31,000 people who are not American citizens are held in immigration detention on any given day,^[84] including children, in over 200 detention centres, jails, and prisons nationwide. The United States government held more than 300,000 people in immigration detention in 2007 while deciding whether to deport them.^[85]

[edit] Deportation

An individual’s deportation is determined in removal proceedings, administrative proceedings under United States immigration law. Removal proceedings are typically conducted in Immigration Court (the Executive Office for Immigration Review) by an immigration judge. Deportations from the United States increased by more than 60 percent from 2003 to 2008, with Mexicans accounting for nearly two-thirds of those deported.^[86]

[edit] Complications

Complications in deportation efforts ensue when parents are illegal immigrants but their children are birthright citizens. Federal appellate courts have upheld the refusal by the Immigration and Naturalization Service to stay the deportation of illegal immigrants merely on the grounds that they have U.S.-citizen, minor children.^[87] There are some 3.1 million United States citizen children with at least one illegal immigrant parent as of 2005; At least 13,000 American children had one or both parents deported in the years 2005–2007.^[88][89]

Such was the case of Mexican Elvira Arellano, who sought sanctuary at a Chicago-area church in an effort to impede immigration authorities from separating her and her eight year old, U.S.-born son. This is also the case in the instance of Sadia Umanzor, an illegal immigrant from Honduras and the central figure of a November 17, 2007, New York Times story. Umanzor was a fugitive from a 2006 deportation order. She was recently arrested, in anticipation of deportation. However, a judge postponed that deportation proceeding. The judge placed her in house arrest, citing her six-month old U.S.-born baby as the factor. ^[90]

[edit] Mass Deportation

According to the Washington Post, Center for American Progress puts the cost of forcibly removing most the nation’s estimated 10 million illegal immigrants at $41 billion a year. Advocates for tougher enforcement of immigration laws did not dispute the study’s figures but disputed its assumptions about how law enforcement would work. The study assumed that tougher enforcement would induce 10 percent to 20 percent of undocumented residents in the United States to leave voluntarily. But Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies argued that as many as half would leave voluntarily. He stated, “We do need to know what enforcement costs, but [the study] is a cartoon version of how enforcement would work.” ^[91]

There have been two major periods of mass deportations in U.S. history. In the Mexican Repatriation of the 1930s, through mass deportations and forced migration, an estimated 500,000 Mexicans and Mexican Americans were deported or coerced into emigrating, in what Mae Ngai, an immigration history expert at the University of Chicago, has described as “a racial removal program”.^[92] The majority of those removed were U.S. Citizens.^[92] Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., cosponsor of a U.S. House Bill that calls for a commission to study the “deportation and coerced emigration” of U.S. citizens and legal residents, has expressed concerns that history could repeat itself, and that should illegal immigration be made into a felony, this could prompt a “massive deportation of U.S. citizens”.^[92] Later, in Operation Wetback in 1954, when the United States last deported a sizable number of illegal immigrants, in some cases along with their U.S born children, U.S. citizens by law, some illegal immigrants, fearful of potential violence as police swarmed through Mexican American barrios throughout the southeastern states, stopping “Mexican-looking” citizens on the street and asking for identification, fled to Mexico.^[93]

[edit] Kennedy jurisprudence

The U.S. Supreme Court on June 16, 2008, per ponented Justice Kennedy ruled (5-4) “that someone who is here illegally may withdraw his voluntarily agreement to depart and continue to try to get approval to remain in the United States.” The lawsuit is about two seemingly contradictory provisions of immigration law. One prevents deportation by voluntary departure from the country. The other section allows immigrants who are here illegally but whose circumstances changed to build their case to immigration officials, and must remain in the US. In the case, Samson Dada, a Nigerian citizen, overstayed beyond the expiration of his tourist visa in 1998. Immigration authorities ordered him to leave the country as he agreed to leave voluntarily, to allow his legal re-entry then if he had been deported.^[94][95]

[edit] Police and military involvement

In 1995, the United States Congress considered an exemption from the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits direct participation of Department of Defense personnel in civilian law enforcement activities, such as search, seizure, and arrests.^[96]

In 1997, Marines shot and killed 18 year old U.S. citizen Esequiel Hernández Jr^[97] while on a mission to interdict smuggling and illegal immigration near the border community of Redford, Texas. The soldiers observed the high school student from concealment while he was tending his family’s goats in the vicinity of their ranch. But at one point, Hernandez raised his .22-caliber rifle and fired shots in the direction of the concealed soldiers. He was subsequently tracked for 20 minutes then shot and killed.^[98][99] 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.”^[100] The killing of Hernandez led to a congressional review^[101] and an end to a nine-year old policy of the military aiding the Border Patrol^[102].

After the September 11, 2001 attacks the United States again considered placing soldiers along the U.S.-Mexico border as a security measure. ^[103] 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^[104], emphasizing that Guard units “will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities.”^[105] 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,”^[106] American Civil Liberties Union (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” ^[107]. According to the State of the Union Address in January 2007^[108], more than 6000 National Guard members have been sent to the US-Mexico border to supplement the Border Patrol^[109], costing in excess of $750 million^[110].

[edit] Local enforcement

There have been extensive efforts on the part of local law enforcement to increase police presence at the border.^{[111][112][113]} 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^{[citation needed]}

State and local governments have responded by passing local laws and ordinances to control illegal immigration within their own jurisdictions^[114]. These laws are primarily aimed at (a) limiting an illegal immigrants’ ability to obtain jobs, housing, or a legally acceptable form of identification. (b) To empower local law enforcement agencies to inquire into an immigrant’s legal status. These law have met with challenges as reported elsewhere in this article.

The Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Office has argued that since the continued presence of unauthorized aliens in the United States incurs a civil penalty, the presence of any undocumented person in the United States is a civil not a criminal offense, and the removal of an unauthorized alien from the United States is an administrative process not a criminal process.^[115]

This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (July 2008)

Several lawsuits have been filed challenging the constitutionality of locally imposed measures, on the grounds that it is not the place of local government to assume the responsibilities of the Federal government.^{[citation needed]} Two of the most closely watched cases involve ordinances passed in Hazleton, Pennsylvania and Farmers Branch, Texas that include fining landlords that rent to illegal immigrants, and allowing local authorities to screen illegal immigrants in police custody. On July 26, 2007, a federal court struck down the Hazleton ordinance as unconstitutional. The ruling is regarded by many to set a legal precedent that can be used to strike down local immigration ordinances nationwide. Hazleton’s mayor has promised to appeal the decision. The Farmer’s Branch ordinance remains under temporary restraining order enjoining enforcement of the ordinance pending a final ruling.

[edit] Sanctuary cities

Main article: Sanctuary city

Several US cities have instructed their own law enforcement personnel and other city employees not to notify or cooperate with the federal government when they become aware of illegal immigrants living within their jurisdiction. These cities are often referred to as “sanctuary cities” and include Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and other mostly large urban cities. Most of these cities claim that the benefit illegal immigrants bring to their city outweigh the costs. Opponents say the measures violate federal law as the cities are in effect creating their own immigration policy, an area of law which only Congress has authority to alter^[116].

Many cities, including Washington, D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Aurora, Colorado, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon, Portland, Maine, and Senath, Missouri, have become “sanctuary cities“, having adopted ordinances banning police from asking people about their immigration status.^[117]

[edit] Community-based involvement

The Minuteman Project has been lobbying Congress for stronger enforcement of the border laws and is organizing private property owners along the U.S.-Mexican border.^{[citation needed]} According to a 2006 report by the Anti-Defamation League, white supremacists and other extremists were engaging in a growing number of assaults against legal and illegal immigrants and those perceived to be immigrants.^[118]

The Indian reservations along the US/Mexico border are being inundated with illegal aliens passing through their lands, leaving debris and waste, as well as committing crimes on tribal lands. ^[119] They have asked the US Government to stop the large number of illegal aliens as they are unable to do so.

The No More Deaths organization offers food, water, and medical aid to migrants crossing the desert regions of the American Southwest in an effort to reduce the increasing number of deaths along the border.^[120]

[edit] Impacts

[edit] Economic

Main article: Economic impact of illegal immigrants in the United States

[edit] Wages and employment

Separate research by both George Borjas, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University and Paul Samuelson, Nobel prize-winning economist from MIT has shown that illegal immigration had a small effect on reducing the economic status of U.S. poor while benefitting middle class individuals and wealthier Americans.^[121]

Research by George J. Borjas (Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University), Jeffrey Grogger (the Irving Harris Professor in Urban Policy in the Harris School at the University of Chicago), and Gordon H. Hanson (the Director of the Center on Pacific Economies and Professor of Economics at UCSD) found that a 10-percent immigrant-induced increase in the supply of a particular skill group reduced the black wage by 4.0 percent, lowered the employment rate of black men by 3.5 percentage points, and increased the incarceration rate of blacks by almost one percent. ^[122]

[edit] Taxes and social services

The IRS estimates that about 6 million unauthorized immigrants file individual income tax returns each year.^[123] Research reviewed by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office indicates that between 50 percent and 75 percent of unauthorized immigrants pay federal, state, and local taxes.^[123] Undocumented workers are estimated to pay in about $7 billion per year into Social Security.^[124]

A paper in the peer reviewed Tax Lawyer journal from the American Bar Association asserts that undocumented immigrants contribute more in taxes than they cost in social services.^[125] The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reviewed 29 reports published over 15 years to evaluate the impact of unauthorized immigrants on the budgets of state and local governments, and found that the tax revenues that unauthorized immigrants generate for state and local governments do not offset the total cost of services provided to those immigrants, but that the amount that state and local governments spend on services for unauthorized immigrants represents a small percentage of the total amount spent by those governments to provide such services to residents in their jurisdictions.^[123]

Using the U.S. INS statistics on how many illegal immigrants are residing in each country and the U.S. Dept of Education’s current expenditure per pupil by state, the estimated cost of educating illegal alien students and U.S.-Born Children of Illegal Aliens in 2004 was $28,607,800,000.^{[126] [127]}

[edit] Mortgages

There is a disproportionate level of foreclosures in some immigrant neighborhoods, with both illegal and legal immigrants increasingly in danger of losing their jobs and their homes.^[128] Around 2005, an increasing number of banks saw illegal immigrants as an untapped resource for growing their own revenue stream and contended that providing undocumented residents with mortgages would help revitalize local communities, with many community banks providing home loans for illegal immigrants.^[129]

In October 2008, talk radio station KFYI reported that according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, five million illegal immigrants hold fraudulent home mortgages.^[130] The story was later pulled from their website and replaced with a correction.^[131] The Phoenix Business Journal cited a HUD spokesman saying there is no basis to news reports that more than 5 million bad mortgages are held by illegal immigants, and that the agency has no data showing the number of illegal immigrants holding foreclosed or bad mortgages.^[132] Radio hosts Rush Limbaugh and Lee Rodgers repeated a variation of the claim without noting that HUD has reportedly stated that this statistic is false.^[133] Roger Hedgecock also repeated the incorrect claim on CNN’s Lou Dobbs show.