Monday, April 26, 2021

Deportado: Colombian Coffee Maker Turns Deportation Into Profit

Screen Shot 2021-04-26 at 6.17.16 PM

Univision has the story of Feliz Zuñiga, the Colombian business Deportado Coffee. From the business' name, you might guess that Zuñiga was deported from the United States to Colombia. And you'd be right. But the story's far more interesting that just that.

Zuñiga lived in the United States for 40 years. He's married to a U.S. citizen and is the father of three U.S. citizen daughters (aged 28, 30, and 32). During his time in the United States, Zuñiga served as a confidential informant for the DEA and the FBI -- in exchange for a reduced sentence when he was convicted of bank fraud. Despite his help to these agencies, and the agencies' promise of an S visa, Zuñiga never received that status. And it was that same 2-decades old conviction that was stated reason for his ultimate exile.

Now living in Colombia, a country he'd left at the age of 17, his daughters helped come up with the idea for the coffee company during a visit. As one told Univision: "We decided to go with the name ‘Deportado’ because of the impact and the irony of importing coffee [made] with deported hands... You know, love our people as much as you love our coffee."


April 26, 2021 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1)

Cert Denial (without Prejudice) in Texas et al. v. Cook County, IL et al.

Supreme-Court-Building-1920x720Today the U.S. Supreme Court declined to grant certiorari in Texas et al. v. Cook County, IL et al., a suit by Texas and thirteen states to defend Trump's public charge rule that makes it difficult to become a lawful permanent resident after using certain public benefits. The Court's order, which leaves open the possibility of a renewed review in the Supreme Court after first raising arguments in the District Court, reads in full as follows:

In 2019, the Department of Homeland Security promulgated through notice and comment a rule defining the term “public charge.” The District Court in this case vacated the rule nationwide, but that judgment was stayed pending DHS’s appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. On March 9, 2021, following the change in presidential administration, DHS voluntarily dismissed that appeal, thereby dissolving the stay of the District Court’s judgment. And on March 15, DHS relied on the District Court’s now-effective judgment to remove the challenged rule from the Code of Federal Regulations without going through notice and comment rulemaking. Shortly after DHS had voluntarily dismissed its appeal, a group of States sought leave to intervene in the Court of Appeals. When that request was denied, the States filed an application for leave to intervene in this Court and for a stay of the District Court’s judgment. The States argue that DHS has prevented enforcement of the rule while insulating the District Court’s judgment from review. The States also contend that DHS has rescinded the rule without following the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. We deny the application, without prejudice to the States raising these and other arguments before the District Court, whether in a motion for intervention or otherwise. After the District Court considers any such motion, the States may seek review, if necessary, in the Court of Appeals, and in a renewed application in this Court.

More detailed reporting on the decision is available on Law360.


April 26, 2021 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: Regional Immigration Enforcement by Fatma Marouf


Regional Immigration Enforcement by Fatma Marouf, Washington University Law Review, Forthcoming


Regional disparities in immigration enforcement have existed for decades, yet they remain largely overlooked in immigration law scholarship. This Article theorizes that bottom-up pressure from states and localities, combined with top-down pressures and policies established by the President, produce these regional disparities. The Article then provides an empirical analysis demonstrating enormous variations in how Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s twenty-four field offices engage in federal enforcement around the United States. By analyzing data related to detainers, arrests, removals, and detention across these field offices, the Article demonstrates substantial differences between field offices located in sanctuary and anti-sanctuary regions, as well as variations within each of those groups. In order to promote more equitable and transparent enforcement, the Article offers recommendations regarding agency guidelines, rulemaking, performance metrics, and institutional designs, examining the strengths and limitations of these approaches.


April 26, 2021 in Current Affairs, Law Review Articles & Essays | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sunday, April 25, 2021

Map of Retaliatory Actions Against Immigrant Activists

Screen Shot 2021-04-25 at 7.14.28 PM

In November 2020, just 7 months ago, Kevin introduced the Immigrant Rights Voices website and the #ProtectImmigrantVoices campaign. As he wrote then:

The website features an interactive map documenting over a thousand instances of retaliation against immigrant rights defenders by numerous U.S. government agencies and highlights the personal accounts of immigrant rights leaders who have been arrested, jailed, surveilled, and deported for their activism. It claims that, by abusing its immense power in an attempt to stamp out dissenting voices in immigrant communities, the government is trampling on the First Amendment right to speak truth to power.

This project is all the more salient to me this week as I watched docu-thriller The Infiltrators (Friday post) and learned more about how the movie's protagonist, Claudio Rojas, was deported in retaliation for his appearance in the film (Saturday post). It's  moving to (quite literally) see the story of Claudio Rojas placed in the context of retaliatory actions taken against other immigration activists.


April 25, 2021 in Current Affairs, Teaching Resources | Permalink | Comments (0)

Human Smugglers Bypass Border Patrol, Deaths on the Border in South Texas


NPR reports on human smuggling in the U.S./Mexico border region.  "Undocumented migrants from Mexico and Central America trekking on foot and packed into vehicles are heading north through South Texas in ever greater numbers. Some are dying along the way in the harsh, arid terrain."

According to the report, Border Patrol officers claim that they are too busy processing asylum seekers to apprehend others crossing unlawfully.  

The story notes the deaths of migrants trying to cross the border.  "In neighboring Brooks County, migrants trek through the unfamiliar ranchland to circumvent a Border Patrol checkpoint on Highway 281. Often, they don't carry enough water and may be out of shape, and they can perish from dehydration.

Just since January, authorities in Brooks County have recovered 22 human remains that are presumed to be migrants dropped off by coyotes, compared to 34 migrants found dead in all of 2020."

NPR quotes a rancher:  "`Think about it: If you regularize people, let 'em come through, give 'em safe passage,' . . . `I mean, everybody's an essential worker anyway, and people are going to work! The policy needs to get away from enforcement and deal with the reality of migration.'"


April 25, 2021 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: The War Against Asian Sailors and Fishers  by Gabriel Jack Chin and Sam Chew Chin

Jack Chew

The War Against Asian Sailors and Fishers  by Gabriel Jack Chin and Sam Chew Chin


Beginning in the 1880s, maritime unions sought federal legislation to prevent Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, and Asian Indian sailors from serving as crew on U.S.-Flag vessels. This campaign succeeded in mandating citizenship requirements for crews which remain in the U.S. Code today. Similarly, federal and state laws limited the ability of Asians to fish, own fishing boats, or to serve on crews of fishing vessels. Few of these laws targeted Asians by name, but legislative history and contemporary media accounts make clear that racial exclusion motivated many facially neutral requirements such as literacy tests and restriction of jobs to citizens or those who had declared their intention to become citizens. As U.S. law restricted naturalization by race from 1790 to 1952, requiring citizenship had direct racial effects—white immigrants could be fishers or sailors, but not Asian immigrants. The expansiveness of exclusionary laws across time, geography, and level of government, its use of proxy categories to achieve racial discrimination, and yet its obscurity today, suggest the comprehensive nature of racial discrimination in the pre-Civil Rights era.


April 25, 2021 in Current Affairs, Law Review Articles & Essays | Permalink | Comments (0)

Saturday, April 24, 2021

Protagonist of The Infiltrators Speaks Out Against Deportation of Whistleblowers


Yesterday I commended the film The Infiltrators to you. As I mentioned in that post, one of the protagonists of the film is Claudio Rojas. And he was deported from the United States soon after the film's release.

Claudio recently penned an op-ed for the Daily Beast. His piece opens with this compelling paragraph:

For the immigration debate in the United States to be meaningful, immigrants themselves have to be able to speak up. We only know about family separation at the border, medical abuse in detention, and worksite raids because immigrants told the truth about what they saw. But some paid a heavy price for their speech. Under the Trump administration, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was routinely used as a political weapon, targeting and deporting immigrant activists and those who spoke to the press. This kind of retribution is terrifying. I know—because it happened to me.

Claudio cites work published by The Intercept identifying "over 1,000 cases of this kind of illegal retribution."

He calls for the return of those immigrants who spoke out about their conditions and were deported in response. After all, he concludes: "The first step toward a more just and humane immigration system is to protect immigrant voices."


April 24, 2021 in Current Affairs, Film & Television | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: Athletes in Transit: Why the Game is Different in Sports and the Visas Should be Too  by David P. Weber


Athletes in Transit: Why the Game is Different in Sports and the Visas Should be Too  by David P. Weber,
Tulane Law Review, Vol. 96, 2021-2022


At least as early as the ancient Olympic games, athletes have traveled to engage in competition. Participation in the games was so revered that military truces were enacted to secure the safety of spectators and athletes alike. In modern times, we can look to the holding of the first modern Olympics in 1896, followed a few decades later in 1930 with the first World Cup as the forefathers of modern international travel for athletes. And of course, this trend followed with the professionalization of sports and the desires of teams and fans to have the best and most commercially successful athletes. U.S. immigration law should be designed and interpreted to facilitate the entry of skilled athletes. Part I of this article provides a background of the current state of visas for both professional and amateur athletes, and e-gamers. Part I also examines potential issues of concern if the NCAA moves to allow student athletes to earn money from the name, image, and likeness. Part II examines the joint economic gains uniquely captured in sport through the importation of foreign players, and demonstrates that the interests of owners, players, and fans are uniquely aligned through the importation of foreign superstar talent. Part III examines how the Trump Administration tightened eligibility requirements through its interpretation and application of EB-1, P, and O visa guidelines over the past 4 years resulting in much greater rates of denial than at any time since the enactment of the COMPETE Act in 2006. Part III also proposes three immediate solutions: new regulations to allow foreign student athletes to earn money from their name, image, and likeness in accordance with proposed NCAA rule changes regarding name, image, and likeness (NIL); a clear category for e-gaming athletes as the field is primed for explosive growth over the next ten years; and a looser interpretation of the requirements for certain visas when utilized by athletes.


April 24, 2021 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, April 23, 2021

Balls of F$%*ing Steel

I don't know, is that heading too much? It's all I could think of as I watched The Infiltrators today. If you're unfamiliar with this film (I was), it follows the TRUE story of undocumented young people who intentionally get put into immigration detention (Broward in Florida) so that they can better report on the conditions of detainees and better advocate for their release. Like I said, balls of f$%*ing steel.

Check out the trailer:

I received access to the film with my registration/attendance at the UCLA Center for Immigration Law and Policy’s Immigration Policy in the Biden Administration: The First 100 Days and Beyond. Amazingly, one of the morning speakers, Claudio Rojas, is one of men who inspired the activists to infiltrate Broward. Rojas ends up a major protagonist in the film and appears to have been deported because of his participation in it. (See here & here.)

Anyhoo -- WATCH THIS FILM. You will not regret it. It's awe inspiring in a literal and not metaphorical sense. The utter fearlessness of these DREAMer activists is stunning. I bow before them.

And if you happened to miss today's segment of the UCLA conference, don't worry. The conference continues over the next two Fridays. And upcoming on April 30, you can catch a conversation with DHS Secretary Mayorkas. I'm in.


April 23, 2021 in Conferences and Call for Papers, Film & Television, Teaching Resources | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 29: Bridging the Scientific-Legal Divide in the Adjudication of Trauma in Immigration Proceedings, UC Davis Global Migration Center

Global Migration_FL_RGB

Bridging the Scientific-Legal Divide in the Adjudication of Trauma in Immigration Proceedings, UC Davis Global Migration Center, Thursday, April, 29, at Noon Pacific Time. Zoom Link here. 


For much of U.S. Immigration, foreign nationals affected by trauma have been excluded or removed from the United States, treated as either “feeble-minded” or public charges, or based on mental health grounds. The aftermath of WWII gave rise to the possibility of trauma as grounds for immigration inclusion under strict narrow circumstances. Initially, trauma as grounds for inclusion applied only to refugees. Eventually, victims of certain violent or transnational crimes such as human trafficking, domestic violence, and child abuse could seek inclusion, although often as part of law enforcement collaboration. As well, for long-term residents of the U.S. with substantial ties, the trauma of family separation also became a ground for inclusion under narrow circumstances. These developments slowly converted medical and mental health professionals exclusively from functioning as government agents of exclusion in immigration proceedings into experts documenting trauma as grounds for inclusion at the border or for protection against removal inside the border. This collaboration across disciplines between immigration lawyers and medical or mental health forensic experts has also given rise to the possibility that the science of trauma could inform norms and practices in the immigration adjudication of cases. This is an emerging and promising field that is leading to innovation in trauma-informed immigration advocacy, research, teaching and trainings, and possibly policy innovation in immigration laws and practices. At UC Davis, an interdisciplinary team led by law professor Raquel E. Aldana as Principal Investigator and Dr. Patrick Marius Koga from the medical school as a co-Principal Investigator have taken steps toward achieving greater understanding among legal norms and legal institutions about how science should inform the adjudication of trauma in immigration proceedings. This presentation will introduce distinct ways that trauma is understood across disciplines and across cultures and present our ongoing work on documenting how immigration forensic assessments document trauma in immigration proceedings.   


April 23, 2021 in Conferences and Call for Papers, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Immigration Article of the Day: (Un)Equal Immigration Protection  by Carrie Rosenbaum


(Un)Equal Immigration Protection  by Carrie Rosenbaum, 50 Sw. L. Rev. 232 (2021)


This article will contribute to immigration equal protection jurisprudential discussions by highlighting the way in which the plenary power in immigration equal protection cases creates a barrier parallel to the intent doctrine—both prohibit curtailment of government action resulting in racialized harm. The scant recognition of the double duty done by plenary power and the intent doctrine reflects the banality of what may appear as a mere redundancy at first glance. However, the insidiousness of the double-barrier all but ensures that equal protection challenges to facially race-neutral immigration laws with disparate impact will fail. Plenary power is effectively duplicative of the intent doctrine because the intent doctrine already results in great deference to lawmakers.

Disproportionate impact is insufficient alone to invalidate a facially nondiscriminatory law on equal protection grounds. In decision after decision, the Court contorts itself to find some other nondiscriminatory purpose to avoid a finding of discriminatory intent. Even without plenary power, the intent doctrine would need to be reimagined for immigration equal protection claims to receive consideration indicative of equality principles.

Interestingly, the Court has applied equal protection guarantees within civil alienage laws, which pertain to noncitizens within the United States. This was done while denying the relevance of equal protection within immigration law, which dictates who can become and remain a member of the legal and political community within the United States.

At the same time that equal protection has been less than protective in immigration law, immigration regulation has been a prime factor in the making (“social construction”) of race through national origin quotas, racial restrictions on naturalization, exploitive policies influenced by labor needs and capitalism, like the Bracero Program, and mass deportation programs targeting or disproportionately burdening particular ethnic groups or persons of particular national origins, like the 1930s era repatriation of Mexican nationals or Operation Wetback in 1954. More recently, other race-neutral immigration policies hide discrimination in colorblind or race-neutral terms, yet reflect President Trump’s demonization of racialized immigrants, policies like immigration bans targeting persons from Muslim majority countries, migrant detention centers on the border imprisoning Latinx migrants, and attempted cancellation of programs like Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Donald Trump’s “Colorblind Repatriation of Latinx Noncitizens,” as described by Kevin Johnson, may result in repatriation of more such noncitizens than any prior administration using national origin as a race-neutral and colorblind proxy to inflict literal and metaphoric violence on Latinx families in the United States. However, when noncitizens raise equal protection challenges to facially race-neutral immigration laws, their claims fail. Why does immigration law exert such a stronghold on the making of race, and why does it so fiercely resist curtailment? Immigration equal protection challenges seem to face an impenetrable wall comprised of immigration plenary power and the equal protection intent doctrine. The plenary power doctrine stands for the proposition that the Court shows great deference to Congress and the Executive branch because of their authority over immigration law resulting in a dilution of constitutional protections for noncitizens, at the expense of equal protection and other constitutional rights. The Court’s recent rejection of the equal protection claim in DHS v. Regents represents the interplay of plenary power and equal protection intent doctrine as overlapping and mutually reinforcing barriers to the curtailment of racial discrimination in immigration law. Because disparate impact equal protection claims require a showing of discriminatory intent, one might expect immigration law’s longstanding racist history to bolster an equal protection claim. That same discriminatory history could plausibly undermine the validity of plenary power. However, neither has been true.

Accordingly, the first section of this article will analyze relevant aspects of the Court’s shaping of the equal protection intent doctrine outside of the immigration setting. The second section will examine the role of plenary power in immigration equal protection jurisprudence, and the third section will consider the Supreme Court’s equal protection ruling in DHS v. Regents and situate it within immigration equal protection jurisprudence.


April 23, 2021 in Current Affairs, Law Review Articles & Essays | Permalink | Comments (0)

American First Legal (a/k/a Stephen Miller's Foundation) teams with Texas in challenge to Biden immigration policies

America First Legal Foundation, a new nonprofit founded by Trump adviser Stephen Miller, is serving as outside counsel to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on the suit filed in federal court in Fort Worth. Here is the press release from American First Legal.  The board of directors of America First Legal includes Miller and other members of the Trump administration.  All are white men.

The suit relies on the Supreme Court’s 2020 decisionr that the Trump administration’s decision to rescind the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy was inadequately justified.

The suit argues that Biden officials have not adequately justified their decisions to rein in orders the Trump administration issued last year. The suit also alleges that a formal exemption that Biden officials granted to allow unaccompanied minors into the U.S. has been expanded to cover families with children.


April 23, 2021 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (3)

Accolades: Emily Ryo


Congratulations to Immigration Professor Emily Ryo! She has been honored with the William A. Rutter Distinguished Award.  This is an award for excellence in teaching.  


April 23, 2021 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, April 22, 2021

April 24: Access to Justice Scholar Showcase

Access to justice

All are invited to a virtual event where the inaugural cohort of the American Bar Foundation/JPB Foundation Access to Justice Scholars will present their research projects and engage in discussions of their work.

Immigration law professor Emily Ryo will be discussing her research on who immigration lawyers are and the contingent nature of their impact on removal proceedings. 




April 22, 2021 in Conferences and Call for Papers, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

May 07: ABA Administrative Law Section Virtual Live Spring CLE Conference

The American Bar Association Administrative Law section is hosting its spring conference with two tracks.  The Homeland Security Law Institute- Regulatory & Legislative, COVID-19, CISA and Immigration Law. The Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice Institute - 101 for Rulemaking, Adjudication, Judicial Review & White House Oversight. Up to 6 hours of live CLE and view all 8 recordings for 30 days!

To access the full conference brochure, click here.



April 22, 2021 in Conferences and Call for Papers, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

From the Bookshelves: Taste of Belonging by Welcoming America

Taste of belonging
Welcome America is presenting a cook book,  Taste of Belonging: A Collection of Recipes and Ways to Strengthen Community Across Differences, to promote cultural understanding. Created as a toolkit and resource guide, the cookbook is intended for individuals and organizations seeking fresh inspiration and tips for building connections and decreasing prejudice in communities.

The introduction to the cookbook quotes chef Jose Andres:

From biryani to bulgogi and tortillas to tikkis, food has the power to evoke memories, bring people together, and transport you to other places. 

Learn more and read the downloadable cookbook here.

To learn even more about using food as a tool for understanding, register for the session on "Fostering a Sense of Belonging in Your Community" at the Welcoming Interactive on May 5.


April 22, 2021 in Books, Food and Drinks | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, April 21, 2021

Conference June 9-11, 2021: ‘Ageing Gracefully? The 1951 Refugee Convention at 70’


‘Ageing Gracefully? The 1951 Refugee Convention at 70’

5th Annual Conference, Refugee Law Initiative (RLI)
9 - 11 June 2021 

The 5th Annual Conference of the Refugee Law Initiative (RLI) will take place from Wednesday 9 June to Friday 11 June 2021. The RLI Annual Conference is an annual international forum dedicated to debating the latest research and developments in the field. 

The 5th RLI Annual Conference builds on the success of previous RLI conferences in uniting refugee law academics, practitioners, policy-makers and students. Run this year as a virtual event over three (3) half-days, this Annual Conference is based on the principle of free and open access online to allow for truly global participation.

1. 2021 Conference Theme

The chosen theme for this year’s conference - ‘Ageing Gracefully? The 1951 Refugee Convention at 70’ – reflects on the enduring legacy of the ‘cornerstone’ treaty for refugee protection 70 years after it was first adopted. 

2. 2021 Keynote Speakers

On this theme, we are pleased to announce that our keynote speakers for the event are:

“Is 'Ageing Gracefully?’ an Ageist Critique?”
Professor James C. Hathaway, James E. and Sarah A. Degan Professor of Law
University of Michigan, USA

“The 1951 Convention at 70: A Postcolonial Perspective”
Professor B.S. Chimni, Distinguished Professor of International Law
O.O. Jindal Global University, India

“States and the Refugee Convention: Circumventing, but not Blatantly Disregarding”
Professor Fatima Khan, Director of the Refugee Rights Unit
University of Cape Town, South Africa

3. 2021 Panel Sessions

Across the three half-days, a fantastic range of current research will be presented across a total of 18 panel slots. The majority of panels address a range of topics relevant to the chosen theme of this year’s conference, including:

  • Framing, interpreting and understanding the Refugee Convention
  • The Refugee Convention and its relationship to other bodies of international law 
  • Implementing the Refugee Convention in national law, policy  and practice
  • The Refugee Convention and emerging global refugee policy (e.g. Global Compacts)
  • Institutional engagement with the Convention - UNHCR, courts, governments, NGOs
  • Applying the Refugee Convention - procedural issues, mass influx etc.
  • Refugee law practice and practitioners – litigating the Refugee Convention
  • Content of asylum and the rights under the Refugee Convention
  • Externalisation, responsibility-sharing/-shifting under the Refugee Convention
  • Contemporary concerns and the Convention

Other ‘open’ panels gather presentations on a wide range of other themes of contemporary interest to law and policy on the protection of refugees and other displaced persons

See here for the full (draft) conference programme.

4. Registration 

All attendees, including presenters, will need to register for the conference. This year, registration at the conference is free of charge.

Registration is available now through this link.


April 21, 2021 in Conferences and Call for Papers, Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, April 20, 2021

Chart of Terminology Changes at CBP

Yesterday, Ming wrote about the reported shift in agency language--from "alien" to "noncitizen". Today, we have access to a copy of the memo issued by Troy A. Miller regarding CBP Communications and Materials. It includes this handy chart:

Screen Shot 2021-04-20 at 9.24.22 PM

A truly excellent resource for your inevitable first-day-of-immigration-law vocabulary lesson.


April 20, 2021 in Current Affairs, Teaching Resources | Permalink | Comments (0)

In Defense of Chain Migration


Here's an abstract of a recent book chapter I've completed defending family immigration.

The vast majority of immigrants to the United States enter through categories set forth in a statutory selection system that emphasizes family reunification. However, since the early 1980s, attacking those family immigration categories has become a popular political sport played every few years. The most recent version of the sport is embodied by the introduction of the RAISE Act and statements condemning so-called “chain migration” by President Trump. The assault on family immigration generally is framed in terms that would replace family categories with those that would enable “skilled” immigrants to immigrate instead. The President, like many others, derides the so-called “chain migration” system as enabling one person to bring in “32 people. . . . You come in and now you can bring your family and then you can bring your mother and your father, you can bring your grandmother.” The claim is that the family-based system allows entry to “virtually unlimited numbers of distant relatives.” Instead, critics of family migration argue that the system should focus more on “merit” rather than family, and assign points to prospective immigrants based on factors like age, education and English skills.

Critics of family immigration and I have different starting points when it comes to priorities in the admissions system. The so-called “merit” proponents claim that to help the economy, more jobs and skill-based criteria should be used. My position is that the nation and its employers would continue to do quite well economically by expanding the family numbers throughout all categories. Furthermore, we do well to look beyond economic values and to consider the values that are important to us as a nation in terms of human rights, moral obligations, and social responsibility.

Somehow those of us who favor not only maintaining but expanding family-based immigration opportunities are viewed as soft on immigration. However, the experiment that we call America is a test of our character and our willingness to believe that we can have a strong country that is caring and diverse. Showing compassion and fairness in our immigration policies is not a sign of weakness. Rather, those traits demonstrate a confidence in a strong rule of law and system of government, but understand that moral obligations and family reunification are essential elements of a civil society. While these traits of a civil society may benefit individuals, they benefit us as a common community as well. For when an individual and their relatives have been enabled to become contributing members of society, we all benefit—socially, psychically, and economically.

You can download the entire chapter draft here.


April 20, 2021 | Permalink | Comments (0)

What America would look like with zero immigration


Professor Justin Gest in commentary on discusses a study showing the potential future benefits of greater immigration.

Gest and a team of economists, and demographers modeled what America would be like if President Trump's restrictioni9st immigration policies remained in place. The study projected the outcomes of a variety of policy scenarios -- one that cuts immigration to zero as Trump effectively did in 2020; one that cuts immigration admissions in half; one that extends recent levels; one that increases recent levels by 50%; and one that doubles recent levels.

The results:  "if immigration remained at near-zero levels, within decades, the country could be older, smaller and poorer. But if the US government welcomed more newcomers, within decades, the country could be younger, more productive and richer."

Gest concludes that the research "demonstrates that more immigration is in the best interests of national survival. We should think of immigration policy not just as a humanitarian obligation or a legacy of our past, but actually as a way to secure the country's future."
Increased immigration is one way to sustain current expenses associated with Social Security payments.

April 20, 2021 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (0)