Illegal immigration to the United States

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. Please help recruit one or improve this article yourself. See the talk page for details. Please consider using {{Expert-subject}} to associate this request with a WikiProject

This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality. Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page. (March 2008)

This article is missing citations or needs footnotes. Using inline citations helps guard against copyright violations and factual inaccuracies. (February 2008)

Illegal Immigration refers to the act of foreign nationals voluntarily resettling in the United States in violation of U.S. immigration and nationality law. Those who have entered the United States in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act are subject to deportation, often after being found to be removable in a civil removal proceeding before an Immigration Judge.

Under Paragraph (a), Title 8, Section 1325 of the U.S. Code^[1], "Improper Entry By Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who

1. Enters or attempts to enter the United States are indictable for the attempt to illegally re-enter the country.^[2]Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense^[3].

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), a bureau of the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), is the primary federal agency tasked with enforcing the immigration laws of the United States of America.

America faced a similar wave of illegal immigration from Mexico in the early 1950s but it was expelled by President Eisenhower with no noticeable damage to the US.

Contents 1 Definition 1.1 Unofficial definitions 2 General profile of illegal immigrants 3 Breakdown by state 4 History 5 Present-day countries of origin 6 Modes of entry 6.1 Visa overstay 6.2 Fraudulent marriage 6.3 Border crossing 6.4 Entry by sea ports 7 Dangers 7.1 Slavery 7.2 Prostitution 7.3 Rape 7.4 Death 8 Causes 8.1 Supply/push factors 8.1.1 Mexico 8.1.1.1 Poor fiscal management 8.1.1.2 Inequality of wealth 8.1.1.3 Participation of authorities 8.1.1.4 Corruption 8.1.2 Other countries and regions 8.1.2.1 Central America 8.1.2.2 China 8.2 Demand/pull factors 8.2.1 Family reunification 8.2.2 Availability of jobs 8.2.3 Failure to prosecute 8.2.3.1 Matrícula Consular identification cards 9 Impacts 9.1 Economic 9.1.1 Impact on poverty 9.1.2 Impact on black Americans 9.2 Impact on social services 9.2.1 Health care 9.2.2 Education 9.2.3 Law enforcement costs 9.2.3.1 Identity theft 9.2.3.2 Drug smuggling 9.2.3.3 Gang violence 9.2.4 Social Security 9.2.5 Environmental 9.3 Impact on national security 9.4 Apprehension & Deportation Expenses 10 Immigration enforcement 10.1 Police and military involvement 11 Public reaction 11.1 Importance of the issue 11.2 Effect on US economy 11.3 Enforcement 11.3.1 Employer sanctions 11.3.2 Increased border security 11.4 Response of government 11.4.1 Federal response 11.4.2 State response 11.4.3 Local response 11.5 Community-based reaction 12 Legal issues 12.1 Locally mandated immigration policy 12.2 Deportation complications 13 See also 14 References 15 Further reading 16 External links

[edit] Definition

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the primary federal agency tasked with enforcing the Immigration and Nationality Act, defines an "alien" as "any person not a citizen or national of the United States"^[4] The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), the primary body of federal immigration law in the United States, also defines the term "alien" as “any person not a citizen or national of the United States.”^[5] The U.S. Department of State defines an "alien" as "a foreign national who is not a United States citizen"^[6]

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service defines an immigrant as "an alien admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident".^[7] The Immigration and Nationality Act defines the term “immigrant” to mean every alien not falling within a set of “classes of nonimmigrant aliens” spelled out in detail by the act, for example: diplomatic personnel, students residing within the US to attend school, athletes attending athletic events, ship and aircraft crew members; and others residing or staying within the United States on a temporary basis. The Act classifies aliens remaining within the US on a permanent basis as immigrants without regards to an individual’s legal status. The U.S. Department of State does not define "immigrant".

Immigrants are classified as illegal for one of three reasons: entering without authorization or inspection, staying beyond the authorized period after legal entry, or violating the terms of legal entry.^[8]

[edit] Unofficial definitions

The Associated Press Stylebook, the primary style and usage guide for most newspapers and newsmagazines in the United States, recommends using "illegal immigrant" rather than "illegal alien" or "undocumented worker"^[9]. According to Voice of America's^[10], a weekly analysis of American English from the official international radio and television broadcasting service of the United States federal government, "The most common term by far, though, at least as reflected in the news media, is illegal immigrants" in reference to people who are in the United States without following immigration laws.^[11]

At the 1994 Unity convention, the four minority journalism groups – the National Association of Black Journalists, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists , the Asian American Journalists Association and the Native American Journalists Association – issued a joint statement on the term illegal aliens: "Except in direct quotations, do not use the phrase illegal alien or the word alien, in copy or in headlines, to refer to citizens of a foreign country who have come to the U.S. with no documents to show that they are legally entitled to visit, work or live here. Such terms are considered pejorative not only by those to whom they are applied but by many people of the same ethnic and national backgrounds who are in the U.S. legally."^[12][13] Press releases from these minority journalism groups in 2006 reaffirmed this position and recommended using "undocumented immigrant" and avoid the term "illegal" as a label^[14][15][16].

[edit] General profile of illegal immigrants

• Most illegal immigrants live in families where the adults are undocumented, but the children are U.S.-born. An estimated 13.9 million people -- including 4.7 million children -- live in families in which the head of household or the spouse is an unauthorized immigrant.^[17]

• Illegal immigrants continue to outpace the number of legal immigrants -- a trend that's held steady since the 1990s. While the undocumented continue to concentrate in places with existing large communities of Hispanics, they are also increasingly settling throughout the rest of the country.^[18]

• Illegal immigrants arriving in recent years tend to have more education than those who've been in the country a decade or more. A quarter has at least some college education. Nonetheless, undocumented immigrants as a group are less educated than other sections of the U.S. population: 49 percent haven't completed high school, compared with 9 percent of native-born Americans and 25 percent of legal immigrants.^[19]

• Illegal immigrants can be found working in many sectors of the U.S. economy. About 3 percent work in agriculture; 33 percent have jobs in service industries; and substantial numbers can be found in construction and related occupations (16 percent) and in production, installation and repair (17 percent).^[20]

• Illegal immigrants have lower incomes than both legal immigrants and native-born Americans, but earnings do increase somewhat the longer an individual is in the country.^[21]

[edit] Breakdown by state

As of 2006^[22], California had 2,830,000 illegal aliens, or 25% of the total Texas had 1,640,000 illegal aliens, or 14% of the total Florida had 980,000 illegal aliens, or 8% of the total Illinois had 550,000 illegal aliens, or 5% of the total New York had 540,000 illegal aliens, or 5% of the total Other top ten states for highest percentage of illegal aliens include; Arizona, Georgia, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Washington.

[edit] History

Year	Name of Legislation/Case	Major Highlights
1882	Chinese Exclusion Act	Restricted immigration of Chinese laborers for 10 years. Prohibited Chinese naturalization. Provided deportation procedures for illegal Chinese. Marked the birth of illegal immigration [in America]. [23] The Act was “a response to racism [in America] and to anxiety about threats from cheap labor [from China].” [24]
1891	Immigration Act	First comprehensive immigration laws for the US. Bureau of Immigration set up in the Treasury Dept. Immigration Bureau directed to deport unlawful aliens. Empowered "the superintendent of immigration to enforce immigration laws"[25].
1898	United States v. Wong Kim Ark[26]	A child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, As a consequence, Chinese immigrants were able to enter the US illegally by claiming they were born in California after the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire destroyed all San Francisco’s birth and citizenship records. "Papers for fictitious children were sold in China, allowing Chinese to immigrate despite the laws." [27]
1921	Emergency Quota Act	Limited the number of immigrants from any country to 3% of those already in the US from that country as per the 1910 census. “An unintended consequence of the 1920s legislation was an increase in illegal immigration. Many Europeans who did not fall under the quotas migrated to Canada or Mexico, which [as Western Hemisphere nations] were not subject to national-origin quotas; [and] subsequently they slipped into the United States illegally.” [28]
1924	Immigration Act	Imposed first permanent numerical limit on immigration. Began a national-origin quota system.
1930s		Federal officials deported "Tens of thousands, and possibly more than 400,000, Mexicans and Mexican-Americans... Many, mostly children, were U.S. citizens." [29] "Applications for legal admission into the United States increased following World War II — and so did illegal immigration." [30] Some used fraudulent marriages as their method of illegal entry in the U.S. "Japanese immigration became disproportionately female, as more women left Japan as "picture brides", betrothed to emigrant men into the U.S. who they had never met." [31]
1950s		America faced a wave of illegal immigration from Mexico in the early 1950s but it was repelled by President Eisenhower. [32]
1952	Immigration and Nationality Act	Set a quota for aliens with skills needed in the US.
1953	Kwong Hai Chew v. Colding Template:344 U.S. 590, 596	The Supreme Court found, "The Bill of Rights is a futile authority for the alien seeking admission for the first time to these shores. But once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders".
1965	INA Amendments	Repealed the national-origin quotas. Initiated a visa system for family reunification and skills. Set a quota for Western Hemisphere immigration. Set a 20k country limit for Eastern Hemisphere aliens.
1970s		The United States saw a total number of illegal immigrants estimated at 1.1 million, or half of one percent of the United States population[33]
1976	INA Amendments	Set a 20k country limit for Western Hemisphere aliens.[34].
1980s		About 1.3 million illegal immigrants entered the US[35]
1982	Plyler v. Doe[36], 457 U.S. 202 (1982)	The Supreme Court of the United States struck down a state statute denying funding for education to children who were illegal immigrants. It established that a state must show that substantial state interests are furthered before that state can deny a discrete group of children the free public education that it offers to other children within its borders. The court also stated that illegal immigrants are "within the jurisdiction" of the states in which they reside and, therefore, receive 14th amendment protections and stated, "We have never suggested that the class of persons who might avail themselves of the equal protection guarantee is less than coextensive with that entitled to due process. To the contrary, we have recognized [457 U.S. 202, 212] that both provisions were fashioned to protect an identical class of persons, and to reach every exercise of state authority."
1986	Immigration Reform and Control Act	Started sanctions for knowingly hiring illegal aliens. Provided amnesty to illegal aliens already in the US. [37] Increased border enforcement.
1990s		Over 5.8 million illegal immigrants entered the US in the 1990s. [38]. Mexico rose to the head of the list of sending countries, followed by the Philippines, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, and China [39].
1990	Immigration Act	Increased legal immigration ceilings. Created a diversity admissions category. Tripled the number of visas for priority workers and professionals with U.S. job offers[citation needed] [40]
1990	United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez[41]	the court reiterated the finding of Kwong Hai Chew v. Colding, 344 U.S. 590, 596 (1953), "The Bill of Rights is a futile authority for the alien seeking admission for the first time to these shores. But once an alien lawfully enters and resides in this country he becomes invested with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution to all people within our borders". Also, clarified Plyer v. Doe, stating, "those cases in which aliens have been determined to enjoy certain constitutional rights establish only that aliens receive such protections when they have come within the territory of, and have developed substantial connections with, this country. See, e. g., Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202, 212 ."
1996	Illegal Immigration Act	Phone verification for worker authentication by employers. Access to welfare benefits more difficult for legal aliens. Increased border enforcement. In the 1990s,
1999	Rodriguez v. United States, 169 F.3d 1342, (11th Cir. 1999)	held that statutes which discriminate within the class of aliens comport with the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment (and the equal protection principles it incorporates) so long as they satisfy rational basis scrutiny.
Post 9/11		it is estimated that in the first half of the decade starting in year 2000 over 3.1 million illegal immigrants entered the United States. [42] the percentage of Mexicans entering the US illegally jumped from 68% in 1998-2001 to 78% in 2001-2005 mostly because of stricter security measures tied to the Sept. 11 attacks [43]. "Illegal immigration from abroad has increased over the past few years. After the attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11th, however, the ability to smuggle immigrants into the country has become increasingly difficult, as all possible ports of entry are being watched closely. Since then, there has been a noticeable decline in illegal immigration." [44]
2002	Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Form Act	Provided for more Border Patrol agents. Requires that school report foreign students attending classes. Stipulates that foreign nationals in the US will be required to carry IDs with biometric technology. [45]
2005	Real ID Act	Required use of IDs meeting certain security standards to enter gov't buildings, board planes, open bank accounts. Established national standards for state driver licenses. Cleared the way for the building of border barriers.
2006	Repatriation Apology	In January, 2006, "California became the first state to enact a bill that apologizes to Latino families for the 1930s civil rights violations." [46]

[edit] Present-day countries of origin

In March of 2006 the Pew Hispanic Center (PHC) estimated the undocumented population ranged from 11.5 to 12 million individuals^[47], a number supported by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO)^[48]. Using data from March of 2004, PHC estimated^[49]

Country of Origin	Percent of all illegal immigrants
Mexico	57%
Central America (and to a lesser extent, South America)	24%
Asia	9%
Europe and Canada	6%
Other	4%

According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security^[50], the countries of origin for the largest numbers of illegal immigrants are as follows:

Country of Origin	Raw Number
Mexico	5,970,000
El Salvador	470,000
Guatamala	370,000
India	280,000
China	230,000

The Urban Institute, a research group in Washington, D.C., estimates "between 65,000 and 75,000 undocumented Canadians currently live in the United States." ^[51]

[edit] Modes of entry

Modes of Entry for the Unauthorized Migrant Population^[52]

Category
Entered Legally with Inspection Non-Immigrant Visa Overstayers 4 to 5.5 Million Border Crossing Card Violators 250,000 to 500,000
Entered Illegally without Inspection Evaded the Immigration Inspectors and Border Patrol 6 to 7 Million

A border crossing card is a card that allows non-immigrants "to commute back and forth each week from Canada and Mexico". ^[53]

[edit] Visa overstay

A traveler is considered a "visa overstay" once he or she remains in the United States after the time of admission has expired. The time of admission varies greatly from traveler to traveler depending on what visa class into which they were admitted. Visa overstays tend to be somewhat more educated and better off financially than those who crossed the border illegally.^[54]

To help track visa overstayer the US-VISIT (United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology) program collects and retains biographic, travel, and biometric information, such as photographs and fingerprints, of foreign nationals seeking entry into the United States. It also requires electronic readable passports containing this information.

Visa overstays mostly enter with tourist or business visas^[55]

Percent of Illegal Immigrants who are Visa Overstayers

Year	Percent
1994	More than half[56]
2006	45%[57]

[edit] Fraudulent marriage

People have long used sham marriages as a way to enter the United States.^[58] One of the most prominent cases was that of Nada Nadim Prouty, a Lebanese immigrant who gained entry into the US as a student, but then married fraudulently to stay in the country, and even became a US citizen and went on to become an employee of the FBI and the CIA, before pleading guilty to conspiracy. ^{[59] [60]} Engaging in a bogus marriage went hi-tech with the case of a Russian woman and an American man arranging a marriage over the Internet. ^[61]

[edit] Border crossing

Each year, an estimated 200,000 to 400,000 illegal immigrants try to make the 15 to 30-mile (48 km) hike through the wilderness to reach cities in the United States. "That works out to a city the size of Baton Rouge, La., living in the park without a sewage system, without garbage collection, without a grid of dedicated roads or sidewalks. They move where they want in four-wheel-drive cars, ATVs, motorcycles, bicycles and their own feet."^[62]

The unfenced rural mountainous and desert border between Arizona and Mexico has become a major entrance area for illegal immigration to the United States, due in part to the increased difficulty of crossing illegally into California.^{[citation needed]} Often, the people that choose to sneak across the border employ expert criminal assistance - smugglers who promise a safe passage into the United States. ^[63] These smugglers are called "coyotes" and are paid thousands of dollars per person they assist in crossing the border.^[64]

The tightening of border enforcement has disrupted the traditional circular movement of many migrant workers from Mexico by increasing the costs and risks of crossing the border, thereby reducing their rate of return migration to Mexico. The difficulty and expense of the journey has prompted many migrant workers to stay in the United States longer or indefinitely. ^[65]

[edit] Entry by sea ports

In 1993, 283 Chinese immigrants attempted entry into the United States via a sea vessel. Ten of them arrived dead. ^{[66] [67]}

[edit] Dangers

There are significant dangers associated with illegal immigration. Aside from the possibility that they may be intercepted and deported, some considerably more dangerous outcomes have been known to result from this activity.

[edit] Slavery

Indian, Russian, Thai, and Chinese women have been reported brought to the United States under false pretenses to be then used as sex slaves. “As many as 50,000 people are illicitly trafficked into the United States annually, according to a 1999 CIA study. Once here, they're forced to work as prostitutes, sweatshop laborers, farmhands, and servants in private homes.” US authorities call it “a modern form of slavery.” ^{[68] [69]}

[edit] Prostitution

The Coalition Against Trafficking in Women has reported scores of cases where women were forced to prostitute themselves. “Trafficking in women plagues the United States as much as it does underdeveloped nations. Organized prostitution networks have migrated from metropolitan areas to small cities and suburbs. Women trafficked to the United States have been forced to have sex with 400-500 men to pay off $40,000 in debt for their passage.” ^[70] At least 45 thousand Central American children attempt to illegally immigrate to the United States every year and many of them finish in brothels as sex slaves, according to Manuel Capellin, director in Honduras of the humanitarian organization House Alliance^[71].

[edit] Rape

The significant amount of rape has become a problem for some women illegally entering another country. “After the coyotes get the women across the [U.S.-Mexico] border, safely on U.S. soil, they gang rape them to show they have total control over them. They hang their panties in the trees as signs of the conquest. . . If the women are young and pretty, they are kept in houses of prostitution where they have to have their families buy them out or work their way out. Of course, none will testify to this because the coyotes know where they are from and can seek revenge on their families in Mexico." ^[72]

[edit] Death

Death by exposure has been reported in the deserts of Southwest, particularly during the hot summer season. ^[73] “Exposure to the elements” encompasses hypothermia, dehydration, heat strokes, drowning, and suffocation. Also, illegal immigrants and coyotes may die or be injured when they attempt to avoid law enforcement. Martinez, points out that engaging in high speed pursuits while attempting to escape arrest can lead to death. ^[74]

[edit] Causes

See also: causes for illegal immigration.

Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, argues that "[illegal immigrants] are going to get here as long as they have economic incentives to come." Jacoby further asserts that politicians and others use construction of a massive fence as a proxy to avoid addressing real issues.^[75]

The Rockridge Institute asks, "What role have international trade agreements had in creating or exacerbating people's urge to flee their homelands? If capital is going to freely cross borders, should people and labor be able to do so as well, going where globalization takes the jobs?... Such a framing of the problem would lead to a solution involving the Secretary of State, conversations with Mexico and other Central American countries, and a close examination of the promises of North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank to raise standards of living around the globe.^[76]

Proponents of this wider strategy are generally critical of the current administration's approach to the issue^{[citation needed]}:

• "Bush's 'comprehensive solution' entirely concerns the immigrants, citizenship laws, and the border patrol. And, from the narrow problem identified by framing it as an 'immigration problem,' Bush's solution is comprehensive. He has at least addressed everything that counts as a problem in the immigration frame.... But the real problem with the current situation runs broader and deeper."^[77]

[edit] Supply/push factors

[edit] Mexico

The Pew Hispanic Center has estimated that 56% of illegal immigrants come from Mexico.^[78]Therefore, it may be worthwhile to focus on causes specific to illegal immigration from Mexico.

[edit] Poor fiscal management

Mexico has a free market economy in the trillion dollar class^[79] and the highest income per capita in Latin America^[80][81]. The Mexican government's failure to follow through on its assurances to the Clinton administration that the Mexican government would invest billions of dollars in roads, schooling, sanitation, housing, and other needs to accommodate new factories, resulted in only a limited number of new factories ("maquiladoras") following NAFTA^[82], the majority of which were produced in a zone near the U.S. border^[83]Fewer factories meant fewer factory jobs^[84]This failure to invest in its infrastructure also meant that China was able to out compete Mexico in the production of inexpensive manufactured goods, thus displacing Mexican workers^[85] . The number of manufacturing workers dropped from 4.1 million in 2000 to 3.5 million in 2004.^[86] Also, the U.S. was able to out compete Mexico in the production of inexpensive corn ^[87] . Consequently, the price of maize in Mexico fell 70% between 1994 and 2001, and the number of farm jobs dropped from 8.1 million in 1993 to 6.8 million in 2002^[88].

[edit] Inequality of wealth

In Mexico, "income distribution remains highly unequal"^[89]. Mexico has a free market economy in the trillion dollar class. Mexico has more billionaires than Switzerland^[90] including Carlos Slim, whom many sources^{[91][92] [93]} say is the world's richest man and who owns 8% of the country's GDP^[94].

Mexico's wealth is centralized in the hands of a minority. 17.6% of Mexico's population lives in extreme poverty, while 30.1% live in moderated poverty, making a total of 47.7% of the Mexican population living in conditions of poverty.^[95]

[edit] Participation of authorities

The Mexican government has worked to make illegal immigration to the U.S. easier.

• It plans to produce 70,000 maps marking main roads and water tanks for people wanting to cross illegally into the US. According to Mauricio Farah of Mexico's Human Rights Commission, "The only thing we are trying to do is warn them of the risks they face and where to get water, so they don't die," But Russ Knocke, a spokesman for US Homeland Security said maps would not improve safety for those trying to cross the border, "It is not helpful for anyone, no matter how well intended they might be, to produce road maps that lead aliens into the desolate and dangerous areas along the border, and potentially invite criminal activity, human exploitation and personal risk,"^[96]"In response to the growing concern over these immigrant deaths, the INS [Immigrantion and Naturalization Service] launched "Operation Lifesaver" ...using patrol flights and search-and-rescue missions to find migrants in distress."^[97]

• the Yucatan government (a state of Mexico) also produces educational materials (a handbook and DVD) to instruct its citizens on how to cross the border and how to avoid notice as an illegal immigrant once the border has been crossed. This guide also tells immigrants where to find health care, how to get their kids into U.S. schools and how to send money home. Sara Zapata Mijares of the Los Angeles Yacatecan Club and officials in Yucatan say illegal immigration is a reality and the guide is a necessity to save lives. Ira Mehlman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform says, "This is really the way they keep their corrupt system afloat, by sending their excess workers to the United States and getting billions of dollars in remittances every year ... so for them this is a worthwhile investment".^[98]

• The Mexican government distributes a comic book which instructs illegal immigrants on how to sneak across the border. ^[99] That comic book recommends to illegal immigrants, once they've safely crossed the border, "Don't call attention to yourself. ... Avoid loud parties. ... Don't become involved in fights." The Mexican government defends the guide as an attempt to save lives. "It's kind of like illegal immigration for dummies," said the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies in Washington, Mark Krikorian. "Promoting safe illegal immigration is not the same as arguing against it."

In 2005, the remittances from Mexican nationals worldwide was $18.1 billion. ^[100] In 2003, former President of Mexico, Vicente Fox stated that remittances of Mexican nationals in the United States, both legal and illegal, totaled $12 billion, and were the largest source of foreign income for Mexico. ^[101].

[edit] Corruption

Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, a survey of international businessmen that ranks countries from least to most corrupt, ranks Mexico at 72nd place out of 179 countries^[102]. This is even lower than such notoriously corrupt countries as drug-ridden Colombia. According to Global Integrity's 2006 Mexico Country Report, corruption costs the Mexican economy as much as $60 billion a year^[103]. A survey by the Center for the Study of Private Sector Economics (Centro de Estudios Económicos del Sector Privado), a Mexican research firm, estimates that 79 percent of companies in Mexico believe “illegal transactions” are a serious obstacle to business development^[104], . The 1994 economic crisis in Mexico associated with rampant government corruption ^[105] resulted in a greatly decreased U.S. dollar value of Mexican wages relative to U.S. production workers^{[106][107][108][86]}.

[edit] Other countries and regions

[edit] Central America

Many of the same issues that apply to Mexico also apply to the countries of Central America."The proportion of Mexican immigrants will almost surely shrink over time...If high immigration continues...Mexico will run out of Mexicans."^{[109][110][111][112]}

[edit] China

Some people have been known to immigrate to the United States in order to be able to have children. Such was the case in 1993 of a Chinese couple who were resisting sterilization orders^[113]

[edit] Demand/pull factors

[edit] Family reunification

The U.S.'s failure to enforce immigration policy assisted a "network effect" - furthering immigration as Mexicans moved to join relatives already in the U.S.^[86], often through Chain migration.

[edit] Availability of jobs

The continuing practice of hiring unauthorized workers has been referred to as “the magnet for illegal immigration.” ^[114]

[edit] Failure to prosecute

Illegal hiring has not been prosecuted aggressively in recent years: between 1999 and 2003, according to the Washington Post, “work-site enforcement operations were scaled back 95 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. ^[115] Major employers of illegal immigrants have included:

• Wal-Mart. In 2005 Wal-Mart agreed to pay $11 million to settle a federal investigation that found hundreds of illegal immigrants were hired by Wal-Mart's cleaning contractors.^[116]

• Swift & Co.. In December 2006, in the largest such crackdown in American history, U.S. federal immigration authorities raided Swift & Co. meat-processing plants in six U.S. states, arresting about 1,300 illegal immigrant employees. ^[117]

• Tyson Foods. This company has also been accused of actively importing illegal labor for its chicken packing plants; However, the jury acquitted the company after evidence was presented that Tyson went beyond mandated government requirements in demanding documentation for its employees. ^[118]

For decades, immigration authorities have alerted ("no-match-letters")^[119] employers of mismatches between reported employees' Social Security cards and the actual names of the card holders. On September 1, a federal judge halted this practice of alerting employers of card mismatches.^[120]

[edit] Matrícula Consular identification cards

The Matrícula Consular ("Consular Registration") is an identification card issued by the Government of Mexico through its consulate offices. The purpose of the card is to demonstrate that the bearer is a Mexican national living outside of Mexico. Similar consular identification cards are issued to citizens of Argentina, Colombia, El Salvador, and Honduras^[121]. This document is accepted at financial institutions in many states and, in conjunction with an IRS Taxpayer Identification Number, allows illegal immigrants to open checking and saving accounts ^[122]

[edit] Impacts

[edit] Economic

Main article: Economic impact of illegal immigrants in the United States

Free market advocates claim that we are not in a free market due to government interference (e.g., taxes, subsidies, etc.), but that if we were, restrictions on free migration would also limit the free market. ^[123][124]

[edit] Impact on poverty

"Supporters of a crackdown argue that the U.S. economy would benefit if illegal immigrants were to leave, because U.S. employers would be forced to raise wages to attract American workers. Critics of this approach say the loss of illegal immigrants would stall the U.S. economy, saying undocumented workers do many jobs few native-born Americans will do."^[125]

Most Americans would not see any wage increases if illegal immigrants disappeared. However, high school drop outs would expect to see an average of 25 dollar a week raise if illegal immigrants disappeared. On the other hand, they would also see an increase in the costs of some goods and services[8]. Illegal immigrants are thought to have disproportionately affected certain groups of American citizens such as black and Hispanic poor. Research by George Borjas, Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University, shows that the average American's wealth is increased by less than 1% by illegal immigration. The effect on wages for middle class individuals was an overall wealth increase. However, illegal immigrants had a long-term reduction of wages among American poor citizens during the 1980s and 1990s by 4.8% ^[126].

Paul Samuelson, Nobel prize-winning economist from MIT, concurs asserts that there is no unitary, singular effect, good or bad, that arises from illegal immigration, but instead a variety of effects on Americans depending on their economic class. Samuelson posits that wealthier Americans tend to benefit from the illegal influx, while poorer Americans tend to suffer.^[127][128]

[edit] Impact on black Americans

Research by George Borjas (Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard University), Jeffrey Grogger (the Irving Harris Professor in Urban Policy in the Harris School at the University of Chicago), and Gordon H. Hanson (the Director of the Center on Pacific Economies and Professor of Economics at UCSD) found that a 10-percent immigrant-induced increase in the supply of a particular skill group reduced the black wage by 4.0 percent, lowered the employment rate of black men by 3.5 percentage points, and increased the incarceration rate of blacks by almost one percent. ^[129]

“We're being overrun,” says Ted Hayes of Choose Black America, which has led anti-illegal immigration marches in south-central Los Angeles, California. “The compañeros have taken all the housing. If you don't speak Spanish they turn you down for jobs. Our children are jumped upon in the schools. They are trying to drive us out.”^[130] He also touts illegal immigration as the biggest threat to blacks in America since slavery.^[131] Hayesâ Crispus Attucks Brigade and the American Black Citizens Opposed to Illegal Immigration Invasion have organized protests against illegal immigration.^[132] Ernesto Zedillo, former President of Mexico and current Director of the Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, asserts that illegal immigrants are only a drain on government services when they are incapable of paying taxes; and that this incapacity is the result of restrictive federal policies that require proof of citizenship. He further argues that the US economy has "crucial" need for migrant workers, and that the current debate must acknowledge this rather than just focus on enforcement.^[133]

[edit] Impact on social services

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.^[134] reviewed 29 reports published over 15 years to evaluate the impact of unauthorized immigrants on the budgets of state and local governments. It found the following

• State and local governments incur costs for providing services to unauthorized immigrants and have limited options for avoiding or minimizing those costs
• The amount that state and local governments spend on services for unauthorized immigrants represents a small percentage of the total amount spent by those governments to provide such services to residents in their jurisdictions
• The tax revenues that unauthorized immigrants generate for state and local governments do not offset the total cost of services provided to those immigrants
• Federal aid programs offer resources to state and local governments that provide services to unauthorized immigrants, but those funds do not fully cover the costs incurred by those governments.

Editorialist Robert Samuelson points out that poor immigrants strains public services such as local schools and health care. He points out that "from 2000 to 2006, 41 percent of the increase in people without health insurance occurred among Hispanics"^[135], although he makes clear that these facts are true of legal as well as illegal immigrants. According to the Center for Immigration Studies, 25.8% of Mexican immigrants lived in poverty — more than double the rate for natives in 1999.^[136] In another report, The Heritage Foundation notes that from 1990 to 2006, the number of poor Hispanics increased 3.2 million, from 6 million to 9.2 million.^[137]

Professor of Law ^[138] writes that the belief that undocumented migrants are exploiting the US economy and that they cost more in services than they contribute to the economy is "undeniably false". Lipman asserts that "undocumented immigrants actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services" and "contribute to the U.S. economy through their investments and consumption of goods and services; filling of millions of essential worker positions resulting in subsidiary job creation, increased productivity and lower costs of goods and services; and unrequited contributions to Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance programs."^[139]

[edit] Health care

Almost $190 million or about 25 percent of the uncompensated costs southwest border county hospitals incurred resulted from emergency medical treatment provided to undocumented immigrants^[140] However, according to a phone survey in which Alexander Ortega and colleagues at the University of California asked illegal immigrants how often they receive medical care, illegal immigrants are no more likely to visit the emergency room than native born Americans ^[141]. A study performed by the RAND Corporation in 2006 interviewed over two thousand people in Los Angeles, asking them what their citizenship status was and how often they received medical care. That study also found that only a small fraction of America's health care spending is used to provide publicly-supported care to undocumented immigrants. The study found that overall, immigrants to the United States use relatively few health services, primarily because they are generally healthier than their American-born counterparts.^[142]

The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) continues to bring injured and ill undocumented immigrants to hospital emergency rooms without taking financial responsibility for their medical care.^[143]

In 2006, the Oklahoma Health Care Authority estimated that it would spend about $9.7 million on emergency Medicaid services for unauthorized immigrants and that 80 percent of those costs would be for services associated with childbirth.^[144]

Madeleine Cosman writes in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons that the burden of illegal immigrants on the health care system in the US has forced many hospitals to close due to unpaid bills and the unfunded mandate of Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). Between 1993 and 2003, 60 hospitals in California alone were forced to close, and many others had to reduce staff or implement other procedures which reduced the level of service they could provide. The article attributes these closings mainly to illegal immigration. [9]

Because of the federal Emergency Treatment and Active Labor Act established in the mid-1990's, any illegal alien may receive medical treatment and an interpreter at a hospital without divulging their insurance, citizenship, or employment status. This generates a significant financial burden on the US economy that remains generally ignored in the lay press.

To reduce the risk of diseases in low-incidence areas, the main countermeasure has been the screening of immigrants on arrival. Prior to being awarded a green card, legal immigrants over the age of 15 must have a chest x-ray or skin test to check for tuberculosis.^[145][146] Illegal immigrants are not screened in this manner.

However, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)], tuberculosis (TB) cases among foreign-born individuals remain disproportionately high, at nearly nine times the rate of U.S.-born persons. Immigration from areas of high incidence is thought to have fueled the resurgence of tuberculosis (TB), chagas, hepatitis, and leprosy in areas of low incidence. In 2003, nearly 26 percent of foreign-born TB patients in the United States were from Mexico. Another third of the foreign-born cases were among those from the Philippines, Vietnam, India and China, the CDC report said.^{[147][148][149]}

[edit] Education

Using the U.S. INS statistics on how many illegal immigrants are residing in each country and the U.S. Dept of Education's current expenditure per pupil by state, the estimated cost of educating illegal alien students and U.S.-Born Children of Illegal Aliens in 2004 for the top five states was as follows^[150]

State	Illegal Alien Students	U.S. Born Children of Illegal Aliens	Total
California	$3,220,200	$4,508,300	$7,728,500
Texas	$1,645,400	$2,303,600	$3,949,000
New York	$1,306,300	$1,828,900	$3,135,200
Illinois	$834,000	$1,167,600	$2,001,700
New Jersey	$620,200	$868,200	$1,488,400
For all 50 states	$11,919,900	$16,687,900	$28,607,800

Spending for public education of undocumented children and U.S.-born children of undocumented parents in K-12 public education in Minnesota for 2003-2004 was a total of $118.14 million to $157.53 million ^[151] For the same time period, total spending in New Mexico at the state and local levels for illegal immigrant schoolchildren was about $67 million ^[152] According to the newsbrief, "the enormous impact of large-scale illegal immigration cannot be ignored." ^[153]

[edit] Law enforcement costs

In 1999, law enforcement activities involving unauthorized immigrants in California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas cost a combined total of more than $108 million. This cost did not include activities related to border enforcement. In San Diego County, the expense (over $50 million) was nine percent of the total county's budget for law enforcement that year.^[154]

A study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas has found that while property-related crime rates have not been affected by increased immigration (both legal and illegal), in border counties there is a significant positive correlation between illegal immigration and violent crime.^[155]

[edit] Identity theft

One large scale multi-million dollar criminal operation connected to illegal immigration is identity theft.^[156]

[edit] Drug smuggling

According to proceedings from a 1997 meeting of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims, "Through other violations of our immigration laws, Mexican drug cartels are able to extend their command and control into the United States. Drug smuggling fosters, subsidizes, and is dependent upon continued illegal immigration and alien smuggling."^[157]

[edit] Gang violence

As of 2005, Operation Community Shield had detained nearly fourteen hundred illegal immigrant gang members.^[158]

"The Salvadoran gang, known to law enforcement authorities as MS-13 because many members identify themselves with tattoos of the number 13, is thought to have established a major smuggling center in Matamoros, Mexico, just south of Brownsville, Texas, from where it has arranged to bring illegal aliens from countries other than Mexico into the United States. MS13 publicly declared that it targets the Minutemen, civilians who take it upon themselves to control the border, to "teach them a lesson", possibly due to their smuggling of various Central/South Americans (mostly other gang members, drugs, and weapons across the border. A confidential California Department of Justice study reported in 1995 that 60 percent of the twenty thousand member 18th Street Gang in California is illegal.^[159]. "Mexican alien smugglers plan to pay violent gang members and smuggle them into the United States to murder Border Patrol agents, according to a confidential Department of Homeland Security memo obtained by the Daily Bulletin."^[160]

[edit] Social Security

Undocumented workers are estimated to pay in about $7 billion per year into Social Security.^[161].

[edit] Environmental

Waves of illegal immigrants are taking a heavy toll on U.S. public lands along the Mexican border, federal officials say.^[162] Mike Coffeen, a biologist with the Fish and Wildlife Service in Tucson, Arizona, is quoted as saying, while surveying the area by airplane: "the level of impact is just shocking."^[163] "Environmental degradation has become among the migration trend's most visible consequences, a few years ago, there were 45 abandoned cars on the Buenos Aires refuge near Sasabe, Arizona and enough trash that a volunteer couple filled 723 large bags with 18,000 pounds of garbage over two months in 2002." ^[164]

"It has been estimated that the average desert-walking immigrant leaves behind 8 pounds of trash during a journey that lasts one to three days if no major glitches occur. Assuming half a million people cross the border illegally into Arizona annually, that translates to 2,000 tons of trash that migrants dump each year." ^[165] Fred Patton, chief ranger at Organ Pipe, is quoted as saying: "We've now got 300 miles of illegal roads these people have cut through the desert, and thousands of miles of illegal trails they've created. We collect over 30 vehicles a year, and we measure the trash they leave behind, everything from cans and bottles to clothes, by the ton. And they've fouled the few water sources to the point they are too filthy now even for the animals to drink."^[166]

Illegal immigrants trying to get to the United States via the Mexican border with southern Arizona are suspected of having caused eight major wildfires this year. The fires destroyed 68,413 acres (276.86 km²) and cost taxpayers $5.1 million to fight.^[167]

[edit] Impact on national security

Mohamed Atta al-Sayed and two of his co-conspirators had expired visas when they executed the September 11, 2001 attacks. All of the attackers had U.S. government issued documents and two of them were erroneously granted visa extensions after their deaths ^[168]. The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States found that the government inadequately tracked those with expired tourist or student visas.

Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, a think-tank that promotes immigration reduction, testified in a hearing before the House of Representatives that

"out of the 48 al-Qaeda operatives who committed crimes here between 1993 and 2001, 12 of them were illegal aliens when they committed their crimes, seven of them were visa overstayers, including two of the conspirators in the first World Trade Center attack, one of the figures from the New York subway bomb plot, and four of the 9/11 terrorists. In fact, even a couple other terrorists who were not illegal when they committed their crimes had been visa overstayers earlier and had either applied for asylum or finagled a fake marriage to launder their status."^[169]

Vice Chair Lee Hamilton and Commissioner Slade Gorton of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States has stated that of the nineteen hijackers of the September 11, 2001 attacks, "Two hijackers could have been denied admission at the port on entry based on violations of immigration rules governing terms of admission. Three hijackers violated the immigration laws after entry, one by failing to enroll in school as declared, and two by overstays of their terms of admission."^[170] Six months after the attack, their flight schools received posthumous visa approval letters from the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) for two of the hijackers, which made it clear that actual approval of the visas took place before the September 11 attacks^[171].

[edit] Apprehension & Deportation Expenses

Border control uses the latest technological advances to help capture these immigrants, sometimes detain/prosecute, and send back over the border. According to the US Department of Homeland Security and the Border Patrol Enforcement Integrated Database, apprehensions have increased from 955,310 in 2002 to 1,159,802 in the year of 2004. "But fewer than 4 percent of apprehended migrants were actually detained and prosecuted for illegal entry, partly because it costs $90 a day to keep them in detention facilities and bed space is very limited. For the remainder of the apprehended migrants, if they are willing to sign a form attesting that they are voluntarily repatriating themselves, they are simply bused to a gate on the border, where they re-enter Mexico." ^[172] "During the summer of 2004, the U.S. government pressured the Mexican government into accepting 'deep repatriation' of as many as 300 apprehended migrants per day to six cities in central and southern Mexico. Each of these 151 chartered flights cost U.S. taxpayers $50,000." ^[173]

[edit] Immigration enforcement

Please see main article, United States–Mexico barrier.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection is responsible for apprehending individuals attempting to enter the United States illegally. The United States Border Patrol is its mobile uniformed law enforcement arm, responsible for deterrence, detection and apprehension of immigrants who enter the United States without authorization from the government and outside the designated ports of entry.

Activity on the United States-Mexico border is concentrated around big border cities such as San Diego and El Paso, which have extensive border fencing and enhanced border patrols.^{[citation needed]} Stricter enforcement of the border in cities has failed to significantly curb illegal immigration, instead pushing the flow into more remote regions and increasing the cost to taxpayers of each arrest from $300 in 1992 to $1700 in 2002.^{[citation needed]} The cost to illegal immigrants has also increased: they now routinely hire coyotes, or smugglers, to help them get across.^[174]

In December 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to build a separation barrier along parts of the border not already protected by separation barriers. A later vote in the United States Senate on May 17, 2006, included a plan to blockade 860 miles (1,380 km) of the border with vehicle barriers and triple-layer fencing along with granting an "earned path to citizenship" to the 12 million illegal aliens in the U.S. and roughly doubling legal immigration (from their 1970s levels)^{[citation needed]} . In 2007 Congress approved a plan calling for more fencing along the Mexican border, with funds for approximately 700 miles (1,100 km) of new fencing.^{[citation needed]} However, there is no assurance that if built, this new fence will reduce the flow of illegal immigrants from Mexico.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Police and military involvement

There have been extensive efforts on the part of local law enforcement to increase police presence at the border.^{[175][176][177]} However, federal judges have ruled that control of illegal immigration is the exclusive domain of the federal government and have prohibited local communities and states from attempting to enforce ordinances intended to control illegal immigration^[178].

In 1995, the United States Congress considered an exemption from the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits direct participation of Department of Defense personnel in civilian law enforcement activities, such as search, seizure, and arrests.^[179] This exemption would have authorized the United States Secretary of Defense to detail members of the Armed Forces to enforce the immigration and customs laws in border areas. U.S. Army personnel were stationed along the U.S.-Mexico border to help stem the flow of illegal aliens and drug smugglers. These military units brought their specialized equipment such as FLIR infrared devices, and helicopters. In conjunction with the U.S. Border Patrol, they would deploy along the border and, for a brief time, there would be no traffic across that border which was actively watched by "coyotes" paid to assist border crossers. The smugglers and the alien traffickers ceased operations over the one hundred mile sections of the border sealed at a time.

In 1997, Marines shot and killed 18 year old U.S. citizen Esequiel Hernandez Jr^[180] while on a mission to interdict smuggling and illegal immigration in the remote Southwest. The soldiers observed the goat herder from concealment for 20 minutes maintaining radio contact with their unit. But at one point, this young man (who the Pentagon says previously had fired shots in the vicinity of Border Patrol agents) raised his rifle and fired shots in the direction of the concealed soldiers. After firing two shots, this young man was, in turn, shot and killed. In reference to the incident, military lawyer Craig T. Trebilock argues that "the fact that armed military troops were placed in a position with the mere possibility that they would have to use force to subdue civilian criminal activity reflects a significant policy shift by the executive branch away from the posse comitatus doctrine."^[181] The killing of Hernandez led to a congressional review^[182] and an end to a nine-year old policy of the military aiding the Border Patrol^[183].

After the September 11, 2001 attacks the United States again considered placing soldiers along the U.S.-Mexico border as a security measure. ^[184] In May 2006, President George W. Bush announced plans to use the National Guard to strengthen enforcement of the US-Mexico Border from illegal immigrants^[185], emphasizing that Guard units "will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities."^[186] Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez said in an interview with a Mexico City radio station, "If we see the National Guard starting to directly participate in detaining people ... we would immediately start filing lawsuits through our consulates,"^[187] American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) called on the President not to deploy military troops to deter aliens, and stated that a "deployment of National Guard troops violates the spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act" ^[188]. According to the State of the Union Address in January 2007^[189], more than 6000 National Guard members have been sent to the US-Mexico border to supplement the Border Patrol^[190], costing in excess of $750 million^[191]. The Cato Institute is among the critics who argue that increasing border security is counterproductive. The institute argues that increasing border security reduces the proportion of illegal immigrants caught at the border and increases the length of time illegal immigrants remain in the country. Cato claims that the only significant change on illegal immigrants has been in length of stay due to the cost of returning. The probability of returning within twelve months has gone from around 45% in 1980 to between 25 and 30% from 1998-2002. Also, the average trip duration has gone from 1.7 years to 3.5 years. According to the Cato Institute, the only important change in security has been one of cost. The Border Patrol's budget has gone from $151 million in 1986 to $1.6 billion in 2002. This has caused the cost of apprehending an illegal immigrant to go from around $100 per arrest before 1986 to around $1700 in 2002.

[edit] Public reaction

[edit] Importance of the issue

Polls by the LA Times/Bloomberg^[192], CBS News/New York Times^[193], and USA Today/Gallup^[194] show that most Americans consider the issue of illegal immigration a serious one. In both the CBS News/New York Times Poll and the LA Times/Bloomberg Poll, close to 2 out of 3 respondents identified the issue as very serious or important.

[edit] Effect on US economy

Polls by NBC^[195], ABC^[196], CBS/New York Times^[197], and the LA Times/Bloomberg^[198] consistently show that the overwhelming majority of Americans believe that the overall impact of illegal immigration is one of harming the US economy. But in the same CBS News/New York Times poll, when asked "Do you think illegal immigrants coming to this country today take jobs away from American citizens, or do they mostly take jobs Americans don't want?" by a ratio of 2-to-1 the answer was "Take Unwanted Jobs". ^[199] One of the most important factors regarding public opinion about immigration is the level of unemployment; anti-immigrant sentiment is highest where unemployment is highest and vice-versa.^[200]

[edit] Enforcement

Most respondents (71%) in a Quinnipiac University Poll^[201] believe that enforcement of immigration laws will require additional measures beyond a border fence.

A CBS News/New York Times poll^[202] indicates that 69% of Americans favor prosecuting illegal immigrants and deporting them for being in the U.S. illegally.^[203] . The same CBS News/New York Times poll, however, asked, "what do you think should happen to most illegal immigrants who have lived and worked in the United States for at least two years?" to which 33% replied they should be deported^[204][205]

A poll by the Manhattan Institute reported that "78% of likely Republican voters favor immigration reform that includes increased border security, tougher penalties for employers who hire illegal workers, a policy that allows illegal immigrants to come forward and register for a temporary worker program that eventually placed them on a path to citizenship. Facing a choice between a registration and earned-legalization plan and a plan that includes deportation and enforcement-only, respondents favored the earned legalization plan 58% to 33%." ^[206]

Most public opinion polls on how to deal with the illegal immigrants already in the country find that the majority of the American public consistently shows support for either a pathway to citizenship or allowing them to stay on as guest workers. ^[207]

A Quinnipiac University Poll^[208] reports that 65% of respondents support employer fines. Yet the Quinnipiac University Poll. Nov. 13-19, 2006, reported that an equal amount of adults (65%) would support creation of a guest worker program that would allow illegal immigrants to register for temporary legal status and employment ^[209]

[edit] Employer sanctions

A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll^[210] indicates that 77% of respondents believe employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants should be punished for their actions. When asked "what do you think, if anything, is the most effective measure in dealing with the issue of illegal immigration?", 76% replied either "more border security", "sanctions against employers", or "more arrests and deportations", while 45% replied "pathway to citizenship" or "guest worker program". ^[211][212].

NBC/Wall Street Journal indicates 57% strongly favor employer fines and 17% somewhat favor them. ^[213]

[edit] Increased border security

A poll by NBC News/Wall Street Journal^[214] indicates that 44% strongly favor increased border security (a fence and more border patrol agents) while 19% strongly oppose.

[edit] Response of government

An ABC News Poll^[215], indicates that most respondents (67%) believe the United States is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into the country and, according to a CBS News/New York Times poll^[216] most Americans believe that US immigration policy needs either fundamental changes (41%) or to be completely rebuilt(49%).

[edit] Federal response

In choosing a presidential candidate, most respondents to a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll^[217] consider his or her stand on illegal immigration to be either an important (66%) or the most important(15%) issue, while a clear minority consider it to be either not too important(16%) or not important at all(2%).

Most respondents (51%) would be upset if Congress does not pass an immigration bill while significantly fewer (22%) would be pleased.

But a Chicago Tribune Super Tuesday exit poll shows that "Experts following the immigration debate claim Republicans had hoped illegal immigration would become a wedge issue between the two parties in the 2008 presidential election." And the report adds, "Voters across the country overwhelmingly and consistently have named the economy as their number one issue, in exit poll data from Super Tuesday and subsequent primaries..."

[edit] State response

According to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll^[218], most respondents (55%) believe state or local police forces should arrest illegal immigrants they encounter who have not broken any state or local laws. However, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll. Nov. 30-Dec. 3, 2007 reported that arrests and deportations were the least important, with border security, sanctions against employers, path to citizenship, and guest worker program heading the list ^[219].

The previously cited CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll poll indicates that most respondents (76%) are against state governments issues driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. A poll by the Field Institute found that "[California] residents are very much opposed (62% to 35%) to granting undocumented immigrants who do not have legal status in this country the right to obtain a California driver’s license. However, opinion is more divided (49% to 48%) about a plan to issue a different kind of driver’s license that would allow these immigrants to drive but would also identify them as not having legal status." ^{[220] [221]}

Further, most respondents (63%) in a Quinnipiac University poll^[222] support local laws passed by communities to fine businesses that hire illegal immigrants while only 33% oppose it.

A May 2006 New York Times/CBS News Poll shows that 53 percent of Americans feel that “illegal immigrants mostly take the jobs Americans don’t want”^[223]. A related poll was also performed by NBC/Wall Street Journal on April 21-24, 2006. In this poll, when asked " If you had to make a choice, would you favor deporting immigrants in America who are not legal citizens and do not have work permits, or would you favor allowing these immigrants to stay in America as long as they pass a security check, meet certain conditions, and pay taxes?", 61 percent of the U.S. population responded "Allow to stay." ^[224].

However, in a third opinion poll by Zogby International in 2005, voters were also asked, "Do you support or oppose the Bush administration's proposal to give millions of illegal aliens guest worker status and the opportunity to become citizens?" Only 35% gave their support, and 56 percent said no. The same poll noted a huge majority, 81%, believes local and state police should help federal authorities enforce laws against illegal immigration.^[225]

[edit] Local response

State and local governments have responded by passing local laws and ordinances to control illegal immigration within their own jurisdictions^[226]. These laws are primarily aimed at (a) limiting an illegal immigrants' ability to obtain jobs, housing, or a legally acceptable form of identification. (b) To empower local law enforcement agencies to inquire into an immigrant's legal status. These law have met with challenges as reported elsewhere in this article.

[edit] Community-based reaction

The Minuteman Project has been lobbying Congress for stronger enforcement of the border laws and is reported to be organizing private property owners along the U.S.-Mexican border for the purpose of building a fence to discourage illegal border crossings.^[227] The Indian reservations along the US/Mexico border are overwhelmed with illegal aliens passing through their lands, leaving debris and waste, as well as committing crimes on tribal lands. They have asked the US Government to stop the flood of illegal aliens as they are unable to do so.

The No More Deaths organization offers food, water, and medical aid to illegal aliens crossing the desert regions of the American Southwest in an effort to reduce the increasing number of deaths along the border.^[228]

According to a 2006 report by the Anti-Defamation League, white supremacists and other extremists are engaging in a growing number of assaults against legal and illegal immigrants and those perceived to be immigrants.^[229]

[edit] Legal issues

[edit] Locally mandated immigration policy

A 1986 law pre-empted most existing state immigration policies and forbids states from enacting tougher criminal or civil penalties for illegal immigration than those set by Congress. Further, the US Supreme Court in De Canas v. Bica, 424 U.S. 351 (1976) stated “[The] power to regulate immigration is unquestionably exclusively a federal power.” The supremacy clause (Article VI, Clause 2) of the United States Constitution makes laws passed by Congress “the supreme law of the land”, thus placing the constitutionality of locally passed laws and ordinances in question.

Several lawsuits have been filed challenging the constitutionality of locally imposed measures, on the grounds that it is not the place of local government to assume the responsibilities of the Federal government. Two of the most closely watched cases involve ordinances passed in Hazleton, Pennsylvania and Farmers Branch, Texas that include fining landlords that rent to illegal immigrants, and allowing local authorities to screen illegal immigrants in police custody. On July 26, 2007, a federal court struck down the Hazleton ordinance as unconstitutional. The ruling is regarded by many to set a legal precedent that can be used to strike down local immigration ordinances nationwide. Hazleton's mayor has promised to appeal the decision. The Farmer's Branch ordinance remains under temporary restraining order enjoining enforcement of the ordinance pending a final ruling.

Several US cities have taken the opposite approach and have instructed their own law enforcement personnel and other city employees not to notify or cooperate with the federal government when they become aware of illegal immigrants living within their jurisdiction. These cities are often referred to as “sanctuary cities” and include Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago and other mostly large urban cities. Most of these cities claim that the benefit illegal immigrants bring to their city outweigh the costs. Opponents say the measures violate federal law as the cities are in effect creating their own immigration policy, an area of law which only Congress has authority to alter^[230].

Many cities, including Washington, D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Aurora, Colorado, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have become "sanctuary cities", having adopted ordinances banning police from asking people about their immigration status.^[231]

[edit] Deportation complications

Complications in deportation efforts ensue when parents are illegal immigrants but their children are birthright citizens. Such was the case of Mexican Elvira Arellano, who sought sanctuary at a Chicago-area church in an effort to impede immigration authorities from separating her and her eight year old, U.S.-born son whom some have called an Anchor baby. This is also the case in the instance of Sadia Umanzor, an illegal immigrant from Honduras and the central figure of a November 17, 2007, New York Times story. Umanzor was a fugitive from a 2006 deportation order. She was recently arrested, in anticipation of deportation. However, a judge postponed that deportation proceeding. The judge placed her in house arrest, citing her six-month old U.S.-born baby as the factor. ^[232]

[edit] See also

• Immigration to the United States
• Operation Wetback
• Immigration reduction
• Nativism (politics)
• Illegal alien
• Sanctuary city
• Minuteman Project
• 2006 United States immigration reform protests

[edit] References

[edit] Further reading

• Barkan, Elliott R. "Return of the Nativists? California Public Opinion and Immigration in the 1980s and 1990s." Social Science History 2003 27(2): 229-283. in Project Muse
• Brimelow, Peter; Alien Nation (1996)
• Cull, Nicholas J. and Carrasco, Davíd, ed. Alambrista and the US-Mexico Border: Film, Music, and Stories of Undocumented Immigrants U. of New Mexico Press, 2004. 225 pp.
• Flores, William V. "New Citizens, New Rights: Undocumented Immigrants and Latino Cultural Citizenship" Latin American Perspectives 2003 30(2): 87-100
• Hanson, Victor David Mexifornia: A State of Becoming (2003)
• Lisa Magaña, Straddling the Border: Immigration Policy and the INS (2003
• Mohl, Raymond A. "Latinization in the Heart of Dixie: Hispanics in Late-twentieth-century Alabama" Alabama Review 2002 55(4): 243-274. ISSN 0002-4341
• Ngai, Mae M. Impossible Subjects: Illegal Aliens and the Making of Modern America (2004),
• Ngai, Mae M. "The Strange Career of the Illegal Alien: Immigration Restriction and Deportation Policy in the United States, 1921-1965" Law and History Review 2003 21(1): 69-107. ISSN 0738-2480 Fulltext in History Cooperative
• Thomas J. Espenshade; "Unauthorized Immigration to the United States" Annual Review of Sociology. Volume: 21. 1995. pp 195+.
• Kennedy, John F. A Nation of Immigrants. New York: Harper & Row, 1964.

[edit] External links

• Federation of American Scientists: Border Security: Fences Along the U.S. International Border (a report of the Congressional Research Service issued on January 13, 2005)
• University of California, San Diego: Center for Comparative Immigration Studies
• U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: Immigration and Nationality Act, Title 8 Code of Federal Regulations
• Pew Hispanic Center: The State of American Public Opinion on Immigration in Spring 2006: A Review of Major Surveys

v • d • e Illegal immigration to the United States and related topics
Issues	Human trafficking · Labor shortage · US-Mexico Border · Economic impact · Population · Immigration reduction · Guest worker program
Proposed legislation	DREAM Act (2001–2007) · H.R. 4437 (2005) · Jackson Lee (2005) · McCain-Kennedy (2005) · SKIL (2006) · S. 2611 (2006) · STRIVE Act (2007) · S. 1348 (2007)
Action	Operation Wetback (1954) · REAL ID Act (2005) · Secure Fence Act (2006) · 2006 Protests
Organizations	Immigration and Customs Enforcement · CHIRLA · CCIR · NIF · FIRM · WAAA · NCLR · FAIR · MMP · MCDC · CCIR · SOS · CIS · NUSA · MPI
Past laws	Naturalization Act of 1795 · 14th Amendment (1868) · Chinese Exclusion (1882) · Gentlemen's Agreement of 1907 · Emergency Quota Act (1921) · Immigration Act of 1924 · Bracero Program (1942–64) · INS Act (1965) · IRCA (1986) · IIRIRA (1996)