Immigration in the Trump Era: An Analysis of Institutional Failures and Policy Recommendations

I. Introduction

Drug dealers. Criminals. Rapists. These are just a handful of the terms that President Donald Trump has used to broadly refer to immigrants seeking protection and opportunity within the United States (Scott, 2019). Not only is this rhetoric rooted in false stereotypes, but it also works to fuel the anti-immigrant movement that is destroying the pillars of American democracy. Over the last four years, we have seen first-hand how immigration policies under the Trump Administration exist as direct threats to the values we uphold as a country. As a country, we should move to denounce these destructive, inhumane laws and reaffirm our steadfast commitment to prioritizing the protection of human rights. While we grapple with the uncertainties of living in the midst of a global pandemic, it is more important than ever to address the growing humanitarian crisis that is being perpetuated within our nation’s very own immigration system.

In this paper, I will explore the Trump Administration’s failure to implement and support policies that work to address the political injustices immigrants face on a daily basis while simultaneously recognizing their most pressing needs. I contend that among these many institutional failures, the most detrimental policies have violated both international and domestic law, failed to provide adequate protection for undocumented workers, and have ultimately criminalized immigrant communities. As the nation stands at a pivotal moment during a crucial presidential transition, it is necessary that our incoming administration recognizes these detrimental policies and establish a firm approach to reform an incredibly broken immigration system. I argue that to resolve these institutional failures, the new administration should strive towards implementing policies that end the militarization of the U.S. border, increase protections for immigrants in the workplace, and help make the pathway to citizenship more accessible for all immigrants. By setting out to tackle these ambitious plans, we are providing the framework to create a system that builds up and celebrates immigrants in the United States, rather than working to tear them down.

2. Institutional Failures

From the Chinese Exclusion Act to the Muslim Ban, the United States has not had a history of immigration policies that it should be proud of. Racism and discrimination have plagued our system for centuries, switching its focus from attacking one minority to another. Within this section, I will be analyzing how the violation of international and domestic law, failure to protect undocumented workers, and criminalization of immigrants are significant institutional failures under the Trump Administration. With the mindset that immigrants must be deserving or sufficiently provide acceptable reasons to migrate here, it is no surprise that the United States immigration system has been set up to fail so many of the individuals who attempt to go through it.

The Violation of International and Domestic Law

         One of the first violations of international law through U.S. immigration policies was Operation Streamline under the George W. Bush Administration. In 2005, Operation Streamline worked to maximize the number of individuals prosecuted for being suspected of entering the U.S. illegally. During the process, up to 80 shackled individuals would be tried at one time with nearly 99% of the cases resulting in pleas (NIF, 2020). Throughout the Trump Administration, we have continued to see a similar hostile and predatory stance against immigrants attempting to cross the border. On July 15th, 2019, the Trump Administration announced a change to basic asylum rules stating that migrants traveling from Central America who pass through other countries in order to reach the U.S. border would no longer be able to apply for asylum (Aguilera, 2019). According to international law, this policy change stood in direct opposition to The UN Refugee Agency’s internationally recognized legal standards for asylum seekers. Shortly following the Trump Administration’s release of this change, the Agency followed with a statement asserting that the new rule raises an asylum seeker’s burden of proof under persecution (Aguilera, 2019). Furthermore, a lawsuit brought forth by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) affirmed that the policy also violated Congress’s “safe third country” policy from the Immigrant Nationality Act, which established that the U.S. would be able to make agreements with other countries so those countries would handle processing asylum claims (Aguilera, 2019). This rule, however, overlooks any collaborative agreement and simply works to bar a migrant from seeking asylum based on the country they are coming from. In a remark during the announcement of the ACLU’s lawsuit, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project Lee Gelernt maintained, “The Trump administration is trying to unilaterally reverse our country’s legal and moral commitment to protect those fleeing danger” (Aguilera, 2019).

Despite the severe impact these changes could have on future asylum seekers, this is not the only illegal and unjust action that the Trump Administration is carrying out across the U.S. border. If depriving endangered asylum seekers of legal protection isn’t horrific enough, one can simply turn to the outright atrocious and inhumane activities that are unfolding within our nation’s detention centers. Throughout the years, detention facilities at the U.S.-Mexico border have captured international headlines as a result of their unethical, illegal conditions. Furthermore, the separation of minors from their parents has sparked protests and outrage from international groups, leaving many to wonder how parents would ever be able to reunite with their children again through such a disorganized, heinous system. In a statement, High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet remarked, “I am deeply shocked that children are forced to sleep on the floor in overcrowded facilities, without access to adequate healthcare or food, and with poor sanitation conditions” (Human Rights, 2019).  This environment, she argues, along with the detention of migrant children, violates international law outlined by the United Nations prohibiting “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment”. As a democratic country, we cannot stand complicit in this intolerable and obscene management of vulnerable immigrant families.

The Failure to Protect Undocumented Workers

`        On Monday, September 14th, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that 400,000 Temporary Protected Status (TPS) migrants could legally have their statuses revoked and thus be deported if they chose not to leave the country voluntarily (Jordan, 2020). For the Trump Administration, this was a significant win for their four-year battle to terminate T.P.S. after arguing that “the crises that triggered the T.P.S. designation have long since passed” (Jordan, 2020). However, for over 400,000 immigrant workers, this meant the terrifying reality that they would have to leave their jobs, homes, and families to return to struggling countries that they no longer had much of a connection to. Unfortunately, precarity and instability are two very well-known sentiments that have been felt within the workplace for undocumented immigrants. For many T.P.S. migrants, life can feel as though you are “liv[ing] in a carton of milk” with the burden of “an expiration date” weighing over your entire life (Griffith, Gleeson, Vazquez, 2020). While having T.P.S. does not provide a solution to every problem a T.P.S. worker faces, it has still supplied a substantial amount of relief. For over 400,000 immigrant workers, this status has provided them with economic mobility, higher wages, and access to formal industries that provide better job stability (Griffith, Gleeson, Vazquez, 2020). Losing these protections would not only subject these immigrants to worse paying jobs but also more exploitation within the workplace.

On the other hand, while Temporary Protected Status does provide some relief for undocumented immigrant workers, it is by no means perfect. Subjectivity has been something that the Trump Administration has taken full advantage of in order to bend immigration laws and policies to do their bidding. In other words, immigrant officials have been given vast power and discretion when individually handling T.P.S. migrant workers. One T.P.S. worker reflected on this concern and expressed,

 “It makes you think...now it doesn’t matter if you have [permission to stay] or not. If the police stop you… and the police [officer] is racist, they can turn you over to immigration [officials]. If the immigration judge is racist, they can send you back to your country. And you can’t do anything” (Griffith, Gleeson, Vazquez, 2020).

Applying these concerns to the larger immigrant workforce, these are common worries that many undocumented immigrant workers share, whether with or without T.P.S. Meanwhile, the Trump Administration has continued to push for increasing audits and workplace raids, while placing more pressure on employers to crack down on their undocumented employees. The results of this have been catastrophic; not only has this pressure exacerbated the inequality of bargaining power between the undocumented employee and their employer, but it has also silenced undocumented voices within the workplace. As the trust between government and immigrant workers erodes, the likelihood that workers will bring legitimate claims of exploitation from the workplace continues to decrease (Griffith and Gleeson, 2017). Regardless of the atrocious exploitation that these undocumented workers have faced, the threat of deportation looming over them has left them with no choice but to remain silent. The lack of workplace protection has brought fear into the lives of hard-working immigrants, resulting in the disruption of their family relationships, erosion of their mental health, and the overall suppression of their voices across the labor force (Griffith and Gleeson, 2019).

The Criminalization of Immigrants and Immigrant Communities

         Anti-immigrant rhetoric fueled by politicians like Donald Trump has single-handedly worked to terrorize and persecute vulnerable immigrant communities across the United States. However, it is important to note that this hyper criminalization executed by the Trump Administration goes further than the rhetoric, detention centers, and zero-tolerance policies that have been mentioned throughout this paper. At the core of these unethical and unjust policies, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has weaponized the U.S. immigration system to disrupt and displace hundreds of thousands of innocent immigrants from the lives they have worked incredibly hard to achieve. More specifically, ICE under the Trump Administration has prioritized the hunting and deporting of undocumented workers (Felbab-Brown, 2017). Despite not having criminal records, many of these workers have been detained and deported. Furthermore, ICE facilities and agents have found themselves collaborating with local law enforcement to carry out immigration duties that involve raids and arrests. Historically speaking, this is not a new concept. In 2005, the Border Protection, Anti-Terrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act, also known as the Sensenbrenner Bill, was introduced and passed in the House of Representatives. The bill was infamously known for its attempt to criminalize “violations of federal immigration law, including illegal presence” (NCSL, 2017). It also consisted of policies that would have authorized local law enforcement to carry out federal immigration law (NCSL, 2017).  Thankfully, the Sensenbrenner Bill was dismantled in the Senate following nation-wide protests in 2006 that set the foundation for what would become the DREAM movement (Abrego, Coleman, Martinez, Menjivar, Slack, 2017). However, many immigrant communities continue to experience significant consequences of the ICE and local law enforcement alliance. In Texas, a state home to 1.5 undocumented immigrants, Governor Greg Abbott signed a law that punished local law enforcement officers who did not support the state’s immigration enforcement against sanctuary cities. These repercussions included fines, the removal from office, and even one-year imprisonment (Felbab-Brown, 2017). Another consequence of ICE working with law enforcement has been the decrease in crime reporting. Following Donald Trump’s transition into office in 2017, reports of sexual assault and domestic violence have decreased by 25% and 10%, respectively among the Los Angeles Latino population (Queally, 2017). These statistics were brought forth by Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck, who attributed the numbers to immigrants fearing that any interaction with law enforcement or local courts could subject them to deportation. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti expressed similar concerns, stating that he also believed parents were attempting to keep their children at home instead of school to avoid the risk of being caught and deported in public (Queally, 2017). During the time the Trump Administration has pressed on with their destructive policies, immigrants and their communities have been criminalized, intimidated, and silenced.

 3. Policy Recommendations

As we navigate towards a new era of immigration policy under the Biden-Harris Administration, it is imperative that we put our best foot forward and learn from the immigration policy failures that have unfurled before us over the last four years. In this section of the paper, I will address the three institutional failures that I have mentioned above by proposing thoughtful solutions that should be considered by the new administration. These solutions focus on ending the militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border, increasing protections for immigrants in the workplace, and finally, making the pathway to U.S. citizenship more accessible.

Ending the Militarization of the U.S.-Mexico Border

         If you travel to the U.S.-Mexico border, you might catch a glimpse of children poking through holes to reach across and brush hands with their parents through a chain-link fence. This is a harsh picture to envision, but unfortunately, a reality that unfolds every day. The militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border has become one of the most fundamental pieces of the Trump Administration’s immigration platform. At the same time, it has also come to symbolize the division and separation of families, cultures, and communities. What many have failed to realize is that the U.S.-Mexico border is much more than a line on a map or a wall in a desert. Over 12 million individuals live within 100 miles of the border and are impacted by its presence on a daily basis. As billions of dollars are being allocated in an attempt to construct a nearly 30-foot concrete wall, policymakers should look to change their perspective on what the border truly represents. Brookings Institute Senior Fellow Vanda Felbab-Brown articulated this mindset perfectly when declaring,

“Rather than a line of separation, the border should be conceived of as a membrane, connecting the tissues of communities on both sides, enabling mutually beneficial trade, manufacturing, ecosystem improvements, and security, while enhancing intercultural exchanges” (Felbab-Brown, 2017).

This perspective provides an accurate depiction of the rich and vibrant relations that could extend between nearby communities on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border if given the chance. Rather than packing our borders with patrol units, 30-foot walls, and detention facilities, we should embrace this unique transnational relationship with open, welcoming arms.

As was mentioned earlier, the militarization at the border has also led to expedited asylum court cases where immigrants are subjected to trauma, family separation, and inhumane suffering. To combat this horrifying reality, the United States should prioritize increasing legal representation for asylum seekers at the border. Although pro bono attorneys, law school clinics, and other immigrant advocates dedicate their services towards helping these vulnerable individuals, the truth is that the demand for legal representation is much higher than the supply (Martin, 1988). Furthermore, subjectivity must be removed from the immigration court system. The perception of an asylum seeker proving his or her worth should not be a legal standard, and the burden of proof is wrongfully too limited in scope. With the world facing a growing number of disasters, from the detrimental effects of climate change to treacherous political unrest, our immigration must acknowledge these pressing matters and adapt our system to accommodate as many endangered, vulnerable individuals as possible.

Increasing Protections for Immigrants in the Workplace

         With so much of U.S. domestic policy centered on strengthening the economy, it is imperative that we prioritize documented and undocumented immigrants in the workplace.  In a study conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research in 2009, immigrants were found to produce an increase in income per worker of 0.5% within each state (Peri, 2009). Additionally, undocumented immigrants contribute about $3.2 billion annually to the State of California alone. However, intimidation and exploitation in the workplace continue to serve as significant barriers. Given the immense precarity that Temporary Protected Status workers currently face as a result of recent court holdings, the Biden-Harris Administration should immediately re-implement T.P.S. and expand its protections for immigrant workers. By renewing the program, those who fear losing their status will be able to maintain it while having better access to jobs that can provide tangible benefits, such as healthcare (Griffith, Gleeson, Vazquez, 2020). At the same time, the program should also consider allowing other migrant workers who previously did not have T.P.S. to apply for it. One of the best ways to accomplish this would be by having President Biden confer with the State Department to decide what new countries would be able to qualify under the program given unpredictable global phenomena that are arising due to global warming.

         In response to the COVID-19’s detrimental impact on the workplace, the Biden-Harris Administration should also prioritize better access to healthcare, relief payments, fair wages, and job leave for undocumented workers. For many without legal status who are struggling to provide for themselves during these trying times, the consequences of getting sick are cataclysmic. Furthermore, we must acknowledge that many undocumented immigrants serve in crucial roles within our economy that place them at the front line of this pandemic. In order to protect our workforce and get our economy back on track, we must broaden our protections for undocumented immigrants in the workplace.

Making the Pathway to Citizenship More Accessible

         Today, there are nearly 11 million undocumented immigrants residing in the United States (Migration Policy, 2020). For years, our country’s immigration debate has been fixated on this growing number, prompting flurries of partisan disputes as policymakers struggle to agree on how exactly to approach it. But from an ethical, just, and humane perspective, the answer is simple: make the pathway to citizenship more accessible. For decades, the process of being lawfully admitted into the United States has been one of the greatest challenges for U.S. lawmakers. Simultaneously, it has served as one of the greatest hindrances to acquiring citizenship for undocumented immigrants. To explain this further, lawful admittance is one of the many qualifications that must be met for an individual to apply for U.S. citizenship. However, it is also one of the qualifications that must be met early on in the process. Thus, for undocumented immigrants attempting to apply, this qualification immediately bars them from continuing further through the process. By virtue of the many immigration quotas that have been enacted throughout the last century, our immigration system has found itself with a backlog that could leave some immigrants waiting a lifetime for a U.S. visa (Bier, 2020). Thus, many immigrants have made the decision to cross the border illegally in a desperate attempt to escape life-threatening conditions back home. To combat this inefficient, broken system, we must pass comprehensive immigration reform that legalizes all undocumented immigrants within the country and reboots our backlogged systems. Instead of resorting to limited quotas that perpetuate the deserving narrative for immigrants and put some countries at a greater disadvantage, we should continue to prioritize processes such as family reunifications that do not place maximum caps on immigration numbers from specific countries. Finally, we should work to improve our citizenship process so that it minimizes subjectivity and accurately reflects the values we cherish as Americans. Testing through oddly-specific oral language requirements, detailed U.S. history questions or subjective moral character judgments are measures that are far too subjective. Rather, we should strive to construct a process that celebrates each individual for the unique perspective that they add to our country’s diverse narrative. Through this, immigrants will have the opportunity to experience what it means be embraced and accepted into American society in a way that they truly deserve.

4. Conclusion

         Immigration has proved to be one of the most widely misunderstood, complex policy matters throughout the history of the United States. And yet, it has shaped the face of our country for generations, while redefining our nation’s narrative as we have progressed further into the future. At the same time, growing anti-immigrant rhetoric and policies under the Trump Administration have solidified the fact that our country needs comprehensive, effective immigration reform. First, we must reaffirm our commitment to protecting immigrant rights and denouncing institutional immigration failures. In this paper, I explored three key institutional failures that have been perpetuated by the Trump Administration: the violation of international and domestic law, the lack of protection for immigrant workers, and the criminalization of immigrants. I then contended that these failures could be resolved under a Biden-Harris Administration by ending the militarization of the U.S. border, increasing protections for immigrants in the workplace, and helping to make the pathway to citizenship more accessible for all immigrants.  By working together to shape an equitable immigration system, we are striving to recognize and celebrate the important role immigrants play in defining the foundations of American society.

References

Abrego, L., Coleman, M., Martinez, D., Menjivar, C., & Slack, J. (2017). Making Immigrants into Criminals: Legal Processes of Criminalization in the Post-IIRIRA Era. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 5(3), 694-715. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/233150241700500308.

Aguilera, J. (2019, July 24). Trump's New Asylum Rule Violates Law According to Attorneys. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://time.com/5626498/trump-asylum-rule-international-law/

Bier, D. (2020, November 11). Immigration Wait Times from Quotas Have Doubled: Green Card Backlogs Are Long, Growing, and Inequitable. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/immigration-wait-times-quotas-have-doubled-green-card-backlogs-are-long

Fact Sheet: Operation Streamline. (2020, September 01). Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-operation-streamline/

Felbab-Brown, V. (2017, September 15). The Wall: The real costs of a barrier between the United States and Mexico. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.brookings.edu/essay/the-wall-the-real-costs-of-a-barrier-between-the-united-states-and-mexico/

Griffith, K., & Gleeson, S. (2017, October 01). The Precarity of Temporality: How Law Inhibits Immigrant Worker Claims. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://hdl.handle.net/1813/75074

Griffith, K., & Gleeson, S. (2019, October 01). Trump's 'Immployment' Law Agenda: Intensifying Employment-Based Enforcement and Un-authorizing the Authorized. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://hdl.handle.net/1813/75139

Griffith, K., Gleeson, S., & Vázquez, V. (2020, January 01). Immigrants in Shifting Times on Long Island, NY: The Stakes of Losing Temporary Status. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://hdl.handle.net/1813/75658

Human Rights. (n.d.). UN rights chief 'appalled' by US border detention conditions, says holding migrant children may violate international law | | UN News. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/07/1041991

Jordan, M. (2020, September 14). 400,000 Immigrants Can Be Forced to Leave the U.S., Court Rules. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/14/us/immigrants-temporary-protected-status.html

Martin, D. A. (1988). 4. In The new asylum seekers: Refugee law in the 1980's: 9th Sokol colloquium on international law: Papers. Dordrecht: M. Nijhoff.

National Conference of State Legislatures. (2017). Border Protection, Antiterrorism and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from http://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/summary-ofthe-sensenbrenner-immigration-bill.aspx

Peri, G. (2009, November 12). The Effect of Immigration on Productivity: Evidence from US States. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.nber.org/papers/w15507

Profile of the Unauthorized Population - US. (2020, November 01). Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/state/US

Queally, J. (2017, March 22). Latinos are reporting fewer sexual assaults amid a climate of fear in immigrant communities, LAPD says. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-immigrant-crime-reporting-drops-20170321-story.html

Scott, E. (2019, October 02). Analysis | Trump's most insulting - and violent - language is often reserved for immigrants. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/02/trumps-most-insulting-violent-language-is-often-reserved-immigrants/