A new series of this newsletter will tackle some of the most common immigration questions out there. Submit which questions you believe need addressed in the comments below.
I have a sort of history question: We used to have periodic "blanket amnesty" programs for immigrants who were undocumented. If they'd been in the US for a few years with no criminal record, they could apply and receive a green card. Why aren't we using this method of blanket amnesty to give DACA recipients ("Dreamers") and others a way to make their immigration status permanent and set them on the path toward citizenship? Thank you for your insights.
Hi Austin! I haven’t been a subscriber for long so apologies if you’ve answered this already. It feels to me like technology has broken down the system of walk-in refugees and asylum seekers that was set up after WW2: there was an assumption that people fleeing problems would move into neighboring countries, usually in some sort of controlled way (land borders, trains, planes) and that natural barriers would keep large numbers of refugees out of the richer countries and spread them amongst poorer countries (e.g. Tibetan refugees in India). But technology has upended that: you can now fly to whichever country offers you the most opportunities, whether for economic improvement or for protection against your reasons for flight, and the internet makes it easier to find people willing to help. As the climate crisis increases refugee flows, I wonder if there needs to be a re-evaluation of the entire global refugee system that would make it harder for refugees to apply for asylum at national borders but make it easier for refugees to find immediate accommodation outside of their own countries as they wait for the Powers That Be to pick a country for them to reside in permanently (or at least until their home country becomes an option again). Is that the way we’re heading? Am I being overly pessimistic? Are there better alternatives?
This is a broad question: but what are the visions for what a productive and efficient immigration system would look like? I've seen outlines of what should be done to the current system, but if we were to scratch that and built from ground up- what is the vision? I feel like this would be so helpful in trying to show another positive view of what immigration could be (for all sides)- besides just making a bad system better... which doesn't seem to be especially convincing to many people.
Hello, I’m a U.S. immigration attorney in Miami. What is your perspective on the likelihood of Congress separating the following areas of immigration: (1) border security; (2) employment-based immigration; and (3) dreamers, in order to tackle each separately and more effectively reach bilateral consensus? Do you believe this strategy should be discussed more prominently?
Why are so few people being released from the NW ICE Processing Center lately? The last few months have seen far fewer releases than usual though the numbers inside are high.
How do we make accurate data on immigration more accessible to the general public (avoiding journal and academic pay walls), and how can we compile more current data, especially on the state level?
The amount of myth-busting we engage in as a legal nonprofit daily is significant, partially because the data is old (immigrant numbers and motivations are completely different today than they were even two years ago), and partially because it's so hard to find accurate, unmanipulated data that the general public can access. Many people are (correctly) wary of how media outlets manipulate the numbers to sensationalize immigration policy, and the absence of reliable, vetted data certainly helps misinformation.
I think it would be interesting to hear your point of view and research on permanent bar. My husband had an attempted entry in 2010 when he turned himself into CBP after being lost in the desert for a few days. He was fingerprinted and returned to Mexico. His OBIM FOIA does not disclose if this was a voluntary return or not. We've seen several attorney and they all have different opinions if he is eligible for I-601A because it only cures one entry without inspection. Maybe an article on how permanent bar effects millions of families and some history on permanent bar and how it especially affects Central and South American migrants given the fact they are more prone to crossing since they are neighboring countries. Also perm bar is another thing Immigration judges can use against migrants when processing them.
A question I'd like to see your analysis about is the demographic profile of U.S.-born citizens in mixed-status households as well as the demographic profile of naturalized citizens in mixed-status households. And, if feasible, the demographic profile of the non-citizens in a "fragile" status such as DACA, TPS (typically lawfully present but "unauthorized") and the household members who totally lack legal status. My hope is that your answer might provide us more nuanced insights about the full community-level impact of anti-immigrant rhetoric and legislation.
Austin, I'm late jumping onto this thread ... A simple question that I should know the answer to: Do those who manage to get an appointment via CBP One receive work permits faster than the standard 150/180 days? (In a March 7 piece in the Arizona Luminaria, John Washington makes a reference to this.) Thanks.
I have a sort of history question: We used to have periodic "blanket amnesty" programs for immigrants who were undocumented. If they'd been in the US for a few years with no criminal record, they could apply and receive a green card. Why aren't we using this method of blanket amnesty to give DACA recipients ("Dreamers") and others a way to make their immigration status permanent and set them on the path toward citizenship? Thank you for your insights.
Hi Austin! I haven’t been a subscriber for long so apologies if you’ve answered this already. It feels to me like technology has broken down the system of walk-in refugees and asylum seekers that was set up after WW2: there was an assumption that people fleeing problems would move into neighboring countries, usually in some sort of controlled way (land borders, trains, planes) and that natural barriers would keep large numbers of refugees out of the richer countries and spread them amongst poorer countries (e.g. Tibetan refugees in India). But technology has upended that: you can now fly to whichever country offers you the most opportunities, whether for economic improvement or for protection against your reasons for flight, and the internet makes it easier to find people willing to help. As the climate crisis increases refugee flows, I wonder if there needs to be a re-evaluation of the entire global refugee system that would make it harder for refugees to apply for asylum at national borders but make it easier for refugees to find immediate accommodation outside of their own countries as they wait for the Powers That Be to pick a country for them to reside in permanently (or at least until their home country becomes an option again). Is that the way we’re heading? Am I being overly pessimistic? Are there better alternatives?
Is there a “crisis” on the US Mexico border? Explain your answer.
This is a broad question: but what are the visions for what a productive and efficient immigration system would look like? I've seen outlines of what should be done to the current system, but if we were to scratch that and built from ground up- what is the vision? I feel like this would be so helpful in trying to show another positive view of what immigration could be (for all sides)- besides just making a bad system better... which doesn't seem to be especially convincing to many people.
Hello, I’m a U.S. immigration attorney in Miami. What is your perspective on the likelihood of Congress separating the following areas of immigration: (1) border security; (2) employment-based immigration; and (3) dreamers, in order to tackle each separately and more effectively reach bilateral consensus? Do you believe this strategy should be discussed more prominently?
Why are so few people being released from the NW ICE Processing Center lately? The last few months have seen far fewer releases than usual though the numbers inside are high.
Broad question:
How do we make accurate data on immigration more accessible to the general public (avoiding journal and academic pay walls), and how can we compile more current data, especially on the state level?
The amount of myth-busting we engage in as a legal nonprofit daily is significant, partially because the data is old (immigrant numbers and motivations are completely different today than they were even two years ago), and partially because it's so hard to find accurate, unmanipulated data that the general public can access. Many people are (correctly) wary of how media outlets manipulate the numbers to sensationalize immigration policy, and the absence of reliable, vetted data certainly helps misinformation.
I think it would be interesting to hear your point of view and research on permanent bar. My husband had an attempted entry in 2010 when he turned himself into CBP after being lost in the desert for a few days. He was fingerprinted and returned to Mexico. His OBIM FOIA does not disclose if this was a voluntary return or not. We've seen several attorney and they all have different opinions if he is eligible for I-601A because it only cures one entry without inspection. Maybe an article on how permanent bar effects millions of families and some history on permanent bar and how it especially affects Central and South American migrants given the fact they are more prone to crossing since they are neighboring countries. Also perm bar is another thing Immigration judges can use against migrants when processing them.
A question I'd like to see your analysis about is the demographic profile of U.S.-born citizens in mixed-status households as well as the demographic profile of naturalized citizens in mixed-status households. And, if feasible, the demographic profile of the non-citizens in a "fragile" status such as DACA, TPS (typically lawfully present but "unauthorized") and the household members who totally lack legal status. My hope is that your answer might provide us more nuanced insights about the full community-level impact of anti-immigrant rhetoric and legislation.
Austin, I'm late jumping onto this thread ... A simple question that I should know the answer to: Do those who manage to get an appointment via CBP One receive work permits faster than the standard 150/180 days? (In a March 7 piece in the Arizona Luminaria, John Washington makes a reference to this.) Thanks.