No result found
Public Religion Research Institute;
The last four years of U.S. immigration policy have been driven by the Trump administration's aggressive stance against all types of immigration, legal and illegal. President Joe Biden has promised to reverse many restrictive immigration policies from the Trump era by reforming the asylum system, raising the cap on refugee admissions, revoking the travel ban on immigrants from several Muslim-majority countries, halting the construction of a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico, suspending all deportations for the first 100 days of his presidency, making the DACA program permanent, and sending a comprehensive immigration reform bill to Congress. The Republican and Democratic parties offer starkly different perspectives on immigration-related issues. But what would an immigration policy that followed American public opinion look like? This report outlines responses to a survey of public opinion on topics such as DACA, the border wall, refugees, and more.
Public Policy Institute of California;
Provides data on the number of illegal immigrants in the United States, countries of origin, areas of settlement, demographics, reasons for immigrating, economic role, and fiscal impact, as well as public attitudes and the immigration policy debate.
National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP);
Family immigration quotas are inadequate and result in separation and long waits for Americans, lawful permanent residents and close family members. Approximately 4 million people are waiting in family immigration backlogs, according to data obtained from the U.S. Department of State and Department of Homeland Security. The wait time for a U.S. citizen petitioning for a brother or sister from the Philippines exceeds 20 years. A U.S. citizen petitioning for either a married (3rd preference) or unmarried (1st preference) son or daughter (21 years or older) can expect to wait 6 to 17 years, depending on the country or origin. Research shows legal immigrants experience faster wage growth than natives, are more likely to start businesses and have higher median years of schooling. Raising family immigration quotas would serve both the humanitarian and economic interests of the United States.
A toolkit for Christian education and action on Comprehensive Immigration Reform.
Human Rights First;
As Congress and the Trump Administration debate immigration policy reforms, one critical—and often misrepresented—piece of information is the extent to which individuals in immigration removal proceedings comply with their court appearance obligations. Based on available data, it is clear that immigrants appear for their immigration court hearings at high rates, particularly when they have legal representation or case management support, and accurate information related to the court process.
The Integration Centre;
This is a survey among members of the Dáil, with the purpose of ascertaining (Teachtaí Dála) TDs opinions, attitudes and interactions with immigration and immigrants.
Immigration Policy Center;
The debate over S. 2611, the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, has been clouded by grossly exaggerated estimates of the likely scale of future immigration under the bill.
American Immigration Council;
President Biden assumed office after making considerable commitments to implement changes to legal immigration in the United States, both to reverse harmful changes by former President Trump, but also in reforming and updating the system more broadly. Trump executed prolonged attacks on many categories of immigrants in thinly veiled attempts to limit the number of noncitizens entering the United States temporarily and permanently. These changes created a series of often duplicative barriers impacting the same populations and limiting the ability of many noncitizens to obtain or maintain immigration status in the United States. While the Biden administration has made significant progress in meeting many of its commitments in restoring and reforming legal immigration in the United States, significant barriers to access remain that will need to be addressed for the system to function in a meaningful manner.This special report analyzes some of the most significant changes to immigration policy made by the Trump administration, as well as the subsequent commitments and accomplishments made by the Biden administration on these issues during its first 100 days. The report also provides recommendations for action throughout the remainder of the Biden presidency to foster a fair and efficient system of legal immigration.
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press;
Examines public opinions of legal and illegal immigrants, immigration along the Mexican border, populations from Asia and Latin America, and proposed policy solutions. Includes a survey of five metropolitan areas with recent immigration increase.
This paper empirically examines how immigration impacts a nation's policies and institutions and finds no evidence of negative and some evidence of positive impacts in institutional quality as a result of immigration.
Migration Policy Centre;
This paper contains a review of the economics literature on the issue of the relationship between immigration and welfare. The review is organised around two questions. First, are immigrants, especially low-skilled immigrants, attracted to welfare-generous states? Second, are immigrants more likely to be recipients of welfare compared to natives? The evidence with respect to both questions suggests that the more extreme fears sometimes expressed in public discourse are exaggerated. While some groups of immigrants might be attracted to welfare-generous states, the effect is unlikely to be significant in terms of public budgets. Similarly, while examples do appear of certain sub-groups of immigrants using welfare more intensively than natives, there are many examples where the opposite holds or where no difference is found. In spite of these findings, a case can still be made that policies should be adopted which convince native populations that excess welfare use by immigrants cannot arise. Such policies may be needed if on-going immigration, which is desirable on many grounds, is to avoid negative political pressure.
American Immigration Council;
The COVID-19 (the novel coronavirus) pandemic, and the related federal response, disrupted virtually every aspect of the U.S. immigration system. Visa processing overseas by the Department of State, as well as the processing of some immigration benefits within the country by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), have come to a near standstill. Entry into the United States along the Mexican and Canadian borders—including by asylum seekers and unaccompanied children—has been severely restricted. Immigration enforcement actions in the interior of the country have been curtailed, although they have not stopped entirely. Tens of thousands of people remain in immigration detention despite the high risk of COVID-19 transmission in crowded jails, prisons, and detention centers that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) uses to hold noncitizens. The pandemic led to the suspension of many immigration court hearings and limited the functioning of the few courts which remain open or were reopened. Meanwhile, Congress left millions of immigrants and their families out of legislative relief, leaving many people struggling to stay afloat in a time of economic uncertainty.This report seeks to provide a comprehensive overview of the impact of COVID-19 across the immigration system in the United States. Given that the landscape of immigration policy is changing rapidly in the face of the pandemic, this report will be updated as needed.