Analyzing Immigration Systems Whats the Point

Immigration Systems: What's the point? Ineffective immigration regulations for migrant deportation on criminal charges places significant burden on the United States, in addition to threatening public safety. Congress enacted the most comprehensive amendments ever to its immigration law in the year 1996, concentrating particularly on deportation of non-citizens convicted of crime. In the half-century prior to this historic decision to enact major amendments, it had already effected incremental alterations to the nation's immigration law (HRW).

America has, for long, been controlling which groups of non-citizens are allowed entry into, and permission to reside in, the nation, as well as their reasons for, and duration of, stay. Initial laws chiefly governed the matter of 'entry' into America, and did not focus much on the issue of deportation. For instance, a general 1875 migration regulation barred entry to alien convicts and prostitutes, while an Immigration Act passed in 1882 prevented idiots, madmen, convicts (save for political convicts), and potential public charges from entering the nation.

Another law, passed in 1891, did not grant polygamists and prospective migrants with serious contagious diseases entry, whilst yet another law, enacted in the year 1917, required a certain level of literacy for admittance into America (HRW). But the concept of deportation is also not new to America. Its history dates back to 1798, when the freshly-instituted American Congress passed its Alien Friends and Alien Enemies Acts that authorized the President of the United States to banish non-citizens he considered dangerous.

Other amendments, passed in the year 1882, forbade Chinese laborers from entering or staying in the country. The 1952 McCarran-Walter immigration act laid the foundation for the current American immigration regulation, formulating deportation procedures, detailing exclusions for political reasons, and devising a quota-based admissions system (quotas were fixed on the basis on nationality). Other key amendments to the U.S. migration regulations have taken place (beginning from the latest) in 1996, 1990, 1988, 1986, 1980, and 1965 (HRW).

Summary of Current Article As per recent DHS (Department of Homeland Security) statistics, innumerable immigrants convicted of crime (including attempted murder and assault) have been freed from detention as their home countries did not agree to have them back. This inability to extradite dangerous criminals has provoked outrage among policymakers and individuals advocating for more stringent immigration regulations. These parties claim the Obama government could be working harder to pressurize unhelpful nations. However, the department is faced with numerous barriers.

The law does not permit it to indefinitely detain migrants it cannot send home. Furthermore, poorer countries are usually unwilling to accept criminals as they lack the resources necessary to handle them (Nixon). "A primary principle of U.S. immigration law is that U.S. citizens can never be denied entry into the U.S.; neither can they ever be forcibly deported from the U.S.

By contrast, non-citizens, even those who have lived in the country legally for decades, are always vulnerable to deportation, especially if they have been convicted of a crime" (HRW). Over a hundred migrants freed from detention by the U.S. government have perpetrated murder later on. A very recent example is that of Haitian migrant, Jean Jacques, who was charged with murdering Casey Chadwick, aged 25, an inhabitant of Connecticut's Norwich; Jacques received a 60-year prison sentence. "Immigration officials say their hands are tied.

In 2001, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of due process barred the government from detaining immigrants indefinitely simply for lack of a country willing to take them" (Nixon). However, experts state that the U.S. federal government does have several options at its disposal, to persuade uncooperative nations into accepting their citizens. Further, immigration personnel can detain migrants who are perceived as a threat to the American public's safety (for instance, potential terrorists) for a longer duration.

Lastly, the law permits visa denial to citizens of nations that do not agree to take back their citizens, should the need arise (Nixon). Conclusion Throughout.