从DACA的兴衰看移民法的未来

Kevin R. Johnson
{"title":"从DACA的兴衰看移民法的未来","authors":"Kevin R. Johnson","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3244880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Observers spanning the political spectrum have characterized the American immigration system as “broken.” Unfortunately, Congress for many years has been unable to forge agreement on the appropriate set of reforms, including a path for regularizing the legal status of the approximately eleven million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Congress also has been unable to change the immigration laws in ways that measurably reduce the undocumented population, which has more than doubled over the last three decades. \nIn no small part due to the prolonged stalemate in Congress combined with a sizable and stable undocumented population spread across the United States, immigration has become nothing less than a high-profile political battleground. Contemporary immigration touches on some of the most contentious divisions in modern American politics, including race, class, and national identity. Taking an enforcement-oriented approach to immigration unparalleled in modern American history, Donald Trump successfully ran for President by making immigration a central plank of his campaign. In so doing, Trump forcefully criticized the Obama administration’s immigration record. Consequently, to place President Trump’s immigration agenda into proper perspective, we must consider his target — the immigration record of President Barack Obama. \nWith immigration reform efforts proving fruitless, President Obama sought through executive action to make improvements at the margins. Created by the Obama administration in 2012, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) over a period of five years shielded from removal hundreds of thousands of young undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children. Through an exercise of executive authority rather than a direct act of Congress, President Obama readily admitted that DACA necessarily was a limited, temporary, and incomplete form of relief for one component of the undocumented immigrant population. It was not intended to extend permanent legal status to undocumented immigrants or to address the many policy problems commonly associated with the contemporary immigration system. At the same time, DACA provided a valuable form of relief, including the authorization to work, to a sub-group of the total undocumented immigrant population. \nClaiming that DACA infringed on the power of Congress to designate the immigrants to be targeted for removal from the United States, the Trump administration provoked considerable controversy and debate in announcing the end of the program. DACA’s rescission posed critically important questions to the entire nation: what would become of the former DACA recipients? Was their removal a possibility? Might Congress provide them relief? In the political uproar following the attempted rescission, DACA became virtually synonymous with the political movement to reform the immigration laws and their enforcement. \nPart I of this essay initially considers President Obama’s immigration record, which saw a record number of removals, Congress’s failure to enact immigration reform, and the Executive Branch’s response through adoption of deferred action policies providing limited relief to a sub-set of the undocumented immigrant population. Exhibiting a devotion to aggressive immigration enforcement like no other president in modern American history, President Trump has focused on immigration enforcement above all other immigration goals and escalated enforcement efforts in new and different directions. With this background in mind, Part II sketches possible future directions for immigration reform in the wake of the rise and fall of DACA.","PeriodicalId":81320,"journal":{"name":"Georgetown immigration law journal","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lessons About the Future of Immigration Law from the Rise and Fall of DACA\",\"authors\":\"Kevin R. Johnson\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.3244880\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Observers spanning the political spectrum have characterized the American immigration system as “broken.” Unfortunately, Congress for many years has been unable to forge agreement on the appropriate set of reforms, including a path for regularizing the legal status of the approximately eleven million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Congress also has been unable to change the immigration laws in ways that measurably reduce the undocumented population, which has more than doubled over the last three decades. \\nIn no small part due to the prolonged stalemate in Congress combined with a sizable and stable undocumented population spread across the United States, immigration has become nothing less than a high-profile political battleground. Contemporary immigration touches on some of the most contentious divisions in modern American politics, including race, class, and national identity. Taking an enforcement-oriented approach to immigration unparalleled in modern American history, Donald Trump successfully ran for President by making immigration a central plank of his campaign. In so doing, Trump forcefully criticized the Obama administration’s immigration record. Consequently, to place President Trump’s immigration agenda into proper perspective, we must consider his target — the immigration record of President Barack Obama. \\nWith immigration reform efforts proving fruitless, President Obama sought through executive action to make improvements at the margins. Created by the Obama administration in 2012, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) over a period of five years shielded from removal hundreds of thousands of young undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children. Through an exercise of executive authority rather than a direct act of Congress, President Obama readily admitted that DACA necessarily was a limited, temporary, and incomplete form of relief for one component of the undocumented immigrant population. It was not intended to extend permanent legal status to undocumented immigrants or to address the many policy problems commonly associated with the contemporary immigration system. At the same time, DACA provided a valuable form of relief, including the authorization to work, to a sub-group of the total undocumented immigrant population. \\nClaiming that DACA infringed on the power of Congress to designate the immigrants to be targeted for removal from the United States, the Trump administration provoked considerable controversy and debate in announcing the end of the program. DACA’s rescission posed critically important questions to the entire nation: what would become of the former DACA recipients? Was their removal a possibility? Might Congress provide them relief? In the political uproar following the attempted rescission, DACA became virtually synonymous with the political movement to reform the immigration laws and their enforcement. \\nPart I of this essay initially considers President Obama’s immigration record, which saw a record number of removals, Congress’s failure to enact immigration reform, and the Executive Branch’s response through adoption of deferred action policies providing limited relief to a sub-set of the undocumented immigrant population. Exhibiting a devotion to aggressive immigration enforcement like no other president in modern American history, President Trump has focused on immigration enforcement above all other immigration goals and escalated enforcement efforts in new and different directions. With this background in mind, Part II sketches possible future directions for immigration reform in the wake of the rise and fall of DACA.\",\"PeriodicalId\":81320,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Georgetown immigration law journal\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Georgetown immigration law journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3244880\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgetown immigration law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3244880","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

各个政治派别的观察人士都把美国的移民制度描述为“支离破碎”。不幸的是,国会多年来一直未能就一系列适当的改革达成协议,其中包括使居住在美国的大约1100万无证移民的法律地位正规化的途径。国会也一直无法改变移民法,以显著减少非法移民的数量,在过去30年里,非法移民人数增加了一倍多。在很大程度上,由于国会的长期僵局,加上遍布美国的大量稳定的无证人口,移民问题已经成为一个引人注目的政治战场。当代移民问题触及了现代美国政治中一些最具争议的分歧,包括种族、阶级和国家认同。唐纳德·特朗普采取了美国现代史上前所未有的以执法为导向的移民政策,他把移民问题作为竞选的核心议题,成功地竞选了总统。在这样做的过程中,特朗普有力地批评了奥巴马政府的移民记录。因此,为了正确看待特朗普总统的移民议程,我们必须考虑他的目标——巴拉克•奥巴马(Barack Obama)总统的移民记录。由于移民改革的努力无果而终,奥巴马总统寻求通过行政措施在边缘做出改善。奥巴马政府于2012年制定了“童年入境暂缓遣返计划”(DACA),该计划在五年内保护了数十万在童年时期被带到美国的年轻无证移民。通过行使行政权力,而不是国会的直接法案,奥巴马总统坦率地承认,DACA对一部分无证移民人口来说,必然是一种有限、暂时和不完整的救济形式。它的目的不是要使无证移民获得永久的法律地位,也不是要解决通常与当代移民制度有关的许多政策问题。与此同时,DACA为非法移民总人口中的一小部分人提供了一种有价值的救济形式,包括工作授权。特朗普政府声称,DACA侵犯了国会指定驱逐目标移民的权力,并宣布终止该计划,引发了相当大的争议和争论。DACA的取消给整个国家提出了一个至关重要的问题:前DACA接受者将何去何从?他们有可能被撤职吗?国会会给他们提供救济吗?在试图撤销该计划后的政治骚动中,DACA几乎成为改革移民法及其执行的政治运动的代名词。这篇文章的第一部分首先考虑了奥巴马总统的移民记录,其中看到了创纪录的驱逐人数,国会未能制定移民改革,以及行政部门通过采用延迟行动政策的回应,为一部分无证移民人口提供了有限的救济。特朗普总统致力于积极的移民执法,这是美国现代史上任何一位总统都无法比拟的。他把移民执法置于所有其他移民目标之上,并在新的、不同的方向上加大了执法力度。考虑到这一背景,第二部分概述了在DACA兴起和衰落之后移民改革的未来可能方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lessons About the Future of Immigration Law from the Rise and Fall of DACA
Observers spanning the political spectrum have characterized the American immigration system as “broken.” Unfortunately, Congress for many years has been unable to forge agreement on the appropriate set of reforms, including a path for regularizing the legal status of the approximately eleven million undocumented immigrants living in the United States. Congress also has been unable to change the immigration laws in ways that measurably reduce the undocumented population, which has more than doubled over the last three decades. In no small part due to the prolonged stalemate in Congress combined with a sizable and stable undocumented population spread across the United States, immigration has become nothing less than a high-profile political battleground. Contemporary immigration touches on some of the most contentious divisions in modern American politics, including race, class, and national identity. Taking an enforcement-oriented approach to immigration unparalleled in modern American history, Donald Trump successfully ran for President by making immigration a central plank of his campaign. In so doing, Trump forcefully criticized the Obama administration’s immigration record. Consequently, to place President Trump’s immigration agenda into proper perspective, we must consider his target — the immigration record of President Barack Obama. With immigration reform efforts proving fruitless, President Obama sought through executive action to make improvements at the margins. Created by the Obama administration in 2012, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) over a period of five years shielded from removal hundreds of thousands of young undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children. Through an exercise of executive authority rather than a direct act of Congress, President Obama readily admitted that DACA necessarily was a limited, temporary, and incomplete form of relief for one component of the undocumented immigrant population. It was not intended to extend permanent legal status to undocumented immigrants or to address the many policy problems commonly associated with the contemporary immigration system. At the same time, DACA provided a valuable form of relief, including the authorization to work, to a sub-group of the total undocumented immigrant population. Claiming that DACA infringed on the power of Congress to designate the immigrants to be targeted for removal from the United States, the Trump administration provoked considerable controversy and debate in announcing the end of the program. DACA’s rescission posed critically important questions to the entire nation: what would become of the former DACA recipients? Was their removal a possibility? Might Congress provide them relief? In the political uproar following the attempted rescission, DACA became virtually synonymous with the political movement to reform the immigration laws and their enforcement. Part I of this essay initially considers President Obama’s immigration record, which saw a record number of removals, Congress’s failure to enact immigration reform, and the Executive Branch’s response through adoption of deferred action policies providing limited relief to a sub-set of the undocumented immigrant population. Exhibiting a devotion to aggressive immigration enforcement like no other president in modern American history, President Trump has focused on immigration enforcement above all other immigration goals and escalated enforcement efforts in new and different directions. With this background in mind, Part II sketches possible future directions for immigration reform in the wake of the rise and fall of DACA.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信