Immigration And Border Security Issues From The Federal And State Perspectives

The paper reveals the understanding of immigration and border security issues from the federal and state perspectives. The landscape of immigration enforcement has dominated the media, where the headlines alert show immigration crackdowns, confusion at ports of entry, increases in deportations, additional executive orders to follow potentially, and legal challenges to the executive orders issued the previous month. According to Lakoff & Ferguson (2017), the priorities of immigration enforcement are not new because the administrators have focused efforts on coordinated deportations and worksite raids of convicted serious crimes. In accordance with the DHS guidelines, immigration and customs enforcement continue to prioritize the categories of unauthorized immigrants from the US, starting with those convicted of criminal offenses ordered to be removed. The guidelines, according to DHS, include the policies that facilitate the release of unauthorized immigrants apprehended and detained at the border.

In accordance with Rios (2014), national security is the top priority when reforming the immigration system; American citizens should be protected where, the employers are responsible for ensuring that they hire legal employees and oppose efforts to give amnesty to illegal immigrants. Hollifield, Martin & Orrenius (2014) determined that the country concentrates on authorizing the current migration law where the outskirt security and the fence development help secure the fringes. The organizations overstep the law and contract the outsiders where businesses have an entrance to the apparatuses with the intention to determine whether an employee is legally eligible to work in the country. Boucher, Infantino, and Salter (2014) explained that the foundation of the American dream is economic opportunity, where the priority is to help create employment and grow the economy. The process of immigration helps an individual accomplish a stable job that aids immigrants in accomplishing their dreams, like saving for the future and homeownership.

It is identified that several questions need to be answered on how executive orders work in practice. Therefore, it is not clear whether DHS has an adequate amount of resources to execute the plans outlined in executive orders and DHS guidelines. The immigration law violation has the potential to initiate removal proceedings. The multinational employees based in the US take heed of the strict immigration plans enforcement which drives the DHS guidelines and executive orders. Chung and Zeng (2016) described that protecting the border is the first priority, which shows officials ignore federal immigration law and shield illegal immigrants from deportation.

The noteworthy fringe security and the development of fences help secure the outskirts, where organizations intentionally violate the law and ought to be fine. According to Chung and Zeng (2016), it is examined that the federal government’s core duties are to control borders and keep a check on the people who enter the US. The promises of border security and immigration law enforcement have failed to materialize. On the other hand, it is examined that amnesty would encourage illegal immigrants and undermine the efforts of the people with the intention to uphold the law rule and institute the changes that make it less demanding for laborers and foreigners to go to the US to enable the economy to develop and flourish. There is little consideration paid to the undertaking of acclimatizing new foreigners, were hurtful migration arrangements seeking reasonable and down-to-earth answers for the broken movement framework for Americans.

Hence, according to the Department of Homeland Security and Congress, there are varieties of solutions faced at the border to the multiple threats ranging from illicit drugs to illegal migration. The immigration debate is underway where Republicans focused on border security and Americans support absolution by guaranteeing that their activities and far-reaching migration change enactment will secure the fringe and additionally reinforce the implementation fix the visa approach. According to Bruno, Argueta, Bjelopera, Garcia, Kandel, and Siskin (2016), the border security passed by the Senate, Immigration Modernization Act (S. 744) and Economic Opportunity in the month of June. The real reform offered for the nation to break down the border security and immigration policies where the bill attempts to address the challenges in one sweeping piece of legislation. Zureik and Salter (2013) determined that the debate has shifted to the House, where the majority of the immigration reform aspects are being measured in a step-by-step manner. In accordance with Chung and Zeng (2016), the ideal approach is the strategy to ensure dynamic reform. Conversely, congress should help against the act of temptation for the sake of action. In the Senate immigration, the provisions of border security are one such kind of example where the risks adopt the policy. Particularly, the nation’s border security challenges could be solved while enforcing the current law (Slack et al., 2015).

Amnesty First, Border Security Later

According to Slack, Martinez, Whiteford, and Peiffer (2015), there was a time when there were 3 million illegal immigrations present in the country. The number is around 12 million, whereas the S. 744 authors included the requirements. There was a certain kind of border trigger in the Secretary of Homeland Security that proponents the claim before amnesty could happen. However, some of the measures would get triggered after the amnesty procedure that has been started already.

No Required Reduction In Illegal Immigration

In accordance with Seghetti (2014), the Senate Immigration bill does not address the illegal immigration flow, but on the other hand, the Congressional Budget Office forecasts that the bill would decrease illegal immigration in the future by one-third to one-half as compared to what it would happen under the existing law. Reyes, Derrick, Langhals and Jr (2017) explained that millions of illegal immigrants would stay or enter the United States illegally where the border could still be deemed secure under the bill provisions. According to Rios (2014), there are many serious flaws in the S. 744 bill, with at least five main issues on border security. The Congress weight is to create enactment, the House ought to be cautious by not taking the way that could serve for the Senate-like absolution charge as a vehicle. The privilege and the right approach are to settle the movement and outskirt security challenges, which require pondering policies. As indicated by Lazaridis (2016), migration discussion in the US has now turned out to be scorching because of the pundits introduced by Obama (The President) as he does not just trust that he does not have the specialists to act without Congress’s assent, yet then again, he additionally conceives that he ought not to change the needs to secure the fringe. The fact of the matter is the critical thing where Congress can enhance the fringe security genuinely and give migration change. Lakoff and Ferguson (2017) clarified that border security is seen to keep the unlawful passage of products and people crosswise over state lines.

According to Hollifield, Martin, and Orrenius (2014), border security is to ensure the effective and safe flow of international trade and commerce. The reform could be comprehensive while the current approach serves the objective. The current approach could tell about the policing on the border and is based on muddled objectives that do not measure benchmarks but mask failure. The failure is to secure the border for the lack of trying. In other words, Hayworth and Eule (2013) determined that Congress has passed almost four laws which increase in Border Patrol Personnel. Hence, Chung and Zeng (2016) identified that there were 14 miles of fencing in 1990 on the border, where 651 miles of new fencing under the administration could increase mobile surveillance capabilities. Security at European borders needs a holistic approach because of the geopolitical circumstances, and the sphere of surveillance and action should focus on the Mediterranean and Africa. The Schengen countries are responsible for their external borders with third countries and, at the same time, responsible for the EU’s external border, acting the other members. For this reason, the methods and tools of border control have to be constantly improved, and the response to the challenges posed by responded to in a timely and effective manner. In order to develop a common system, there must be a common culture, common and sufficient capacities, patterns and oiled cooperation (Bruno et al., 2016).

According to Chung and Zeng (2016), the country spends money and adds some agents that show that the border may not be secured but will be a complicated trade. Therefore, nations cannot seek security without shattering trade, where countries may have open borders if they want a real kind of security. Hayworth and Eule (2013) explained that there could be more fences, tracks, and vehicles, but only if the person can prepare to diminish the flow of commerce. Hence, the nation has wisely opted for a balanced approach in the context of immigration and balanced security issues. It is also identified that the President announced some of the series with executive orders that give departments with resources, personnel, and tools to perform the critical work to secure the borders and ensure that people pose a threat to public safety or national security that could not enter in the country and enforce the immigration laws (Bruno et al., 2016).

Hayworth and Eule (2013) determined that illegal immigration contributes to population development dramatically across America. There are recent recessions and high unemployment, where immigration authorities evaluated that the illegal alien population was increasing the half a million individuals per year.

In the view of Hayworth and Eule (2013), some of the main components related to immigration control, apprehension, deterrence, and removal need to strengthen the executive branch and Congress if the control could ever be re-established. A balanced approach requires controlling illegal immigration with a wide range of enforcement where such kind of improvement goes far beyond the border. Hayworth and Eule (2013) described that this may include procedural reforms, the investigation regarding the documents as well as main improvements related to the deportation and detention processes. This also includes judicial review limitations, resources, enhanced intelligence capacity and improved federal/state cooperation. According to Bruno et al. (2016), the port and border security agencies are charged with the intention to keep their nation safe from terrorists and illegal and smuggled goods. The researchers identified port and border security challenges and immigration problems as well as gave suggestions on Border and Customs Security on ways to best allocate the limited resources. In accordance with Hayworth and Eule (2013), Brexit negotiations have now focused on immigration, sovereignty, and trade. The decision by the United Kingdom to leave the European Union raises some of the important security questions and defense all around the world.

Federal Immigration Law

Federal migration law both forces the obligation and gives the way to the Federal Government, in collaboration with outskirt States, to secure the Nation’s southern fringe. Albeit Federal immigration law gives a hearty structure to Federal-State organizations in upholding our migration laws – and Congress has approved and given appointments to secure our fringes – the Federal Government has neglected to release this essential sovereign obligation. The motivation behind this request is to coordinate official divisions and organizations (offices) to convey every single legitimate intent to secure the Nation’s southern outskirts, to avoid promoting unlawful migration into the United States, and to repatriate displaced people quickly, reliably, and altruistically (Lazaridis, 2016).

Federal State Agreements

It is the policy of the official branch to enable State and nearby law implementation organizations the nation over to play out the elements of a migration officer inside the United States to the greatest degree allowed by law (Lazaridis, 2016). Throughout the years, it appears just as our nation has turned out to be more populated and dangerous from the unlawful foreigners who carry merchandise, for example, medications and weapons, which make it into the United States. In spite of the fact that there are numerous unlawful outsiders and stashs that can make it into the U.S. undetected, there are a lot of individuals and booty that are gotten by U.S. Traditions and Border Protection (CBP). The CBP is a part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and was framed in 2003. It is one of the world’s biggest law requirement associations and is accused of keeping fear mongers and their weapons out of the U.S” (CBP) (Boucher et al., 2014).

Immigration Modernization Act Or The S. 744 Bill

The bill adopted a complete strategy to modernize the U.S. movement framework, giving an intense yet reasonable pathway to citizenship for unapproved settlers living in the nation, refreshing the lawful visa framework for the 21st century, and making the biggest and most costly interests in outskirt security to date. Be that as it may, the House of Representatives declined to think of it as—or some other type of migration change—and S. 744 died in some horrible, nightmarish way in the 113th Congress. In the 114th Congress, the main bits of migration enactment talked about so far have been implemented just bills, a long way from the all-encompassing arrangements offered by S. 744 (Lazaridis, 2016). It is in the preparatory phase of the implementation of the activities to be developed; the country will focus on the areas of border management and the fight against immigration Trafficking in human beings. It is thus necessary to welcome immigrants to the European Union’s space. A sustainable immigration policy is being implemented alongside the rigorous control of the external border and obligatorily of adjacent areas under penalty of immigration policies that do not fulfill their desideratum. This control should reduce the flow of illegal immigrants and reduce the scourge of deaths at sea, where many immigrants who are looking for better living conditions put their lives at risk.

U.S. Immigration Reform Didn’t Happen In 2013

Immigration reform, without a doubt, was on the Washington plan in 2014, after a thrill ride of a year that started with a huge force for administrative activity yet finished without coming about. While entering 2013, the political stars appeared to be adjusted to accomplish clearing immigration reform of the sort the United States achieves just like clockwork. Prospects crested when the Senate passed a significant update enactment in June. In any case, activity slowed down in the House of Representatives, where the bipartisan Senate charge discovered little support in the GOP-drove chamber (Boucher et al., 2014). On the off chance that the House takes up migration this year, it is well on the way to vote on a progression of bills separately or in bunches as opposed to taking up an omnibus bill, for example, the one endorsed by the Senate. In this way, foreseeing subsequent stages is subtle. Boehner has precluded going to meeting with the Senate-passed S. 744, and it is indistinct how the Senate will react to the entry of piecemeal House bills (Stevens and Williams, 2016).

References

Bruno, A., Argueta, C. N., Bjelopera, J. P., Garcia, M. J., Kandel, W. A., & Siskin, A. (2016). Immigration Legislation and Issues in the 114th Congress.

Chung, W., & Zeng, D. (2016). Social‐media‐based public policy informatics: Sentiment and network analyses of US Immigration and border security. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(7), 1588-1606.

Cote-Boucher, K., Infantino, F., & Salter, M. B. (2014). Border security as practice: An agenda for research. Security Dialogue, 45(3), 195-208.

Hayworth, J. D., & Eule, J. (2013). Whatever it takes: Illegal immigration, border security, and the war on terror. Regnery Publishing.

Hollifield, J., Martin, P., & Orrenius, P. (2014). Controlling immigration: A global perspective. Stanford University Press.

Lakoff, G., & Ferguson, S. (2017). The framing of immigration.

Lazaridis, G. (2016). Security, insecurity, and migration in Europe. Routledge.

Luna-Reyes, L. F., Derrick, D. C., Langhals, B., & Nunamaker Jr, J. F. (2017). Collaborative cross-border security infrastructure and systems: Identifying policy, managerial and technological challenges. In Remote Work and Collaboration: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice (pp. 640-658). IGI Global.

Rios, V. (2014). Security issues and immigration flows Drug-violence refugees, the new Mexican immigrants. Latin American Research Review, 49(3), 3.

Seghetti, L. (2014). Border Security: Immigration enforcement between ports of entry. Congressional Research Service, Washington, DC.

Slack, J., Martinez, D. E., Whiteford, S., & Peiffer, E. (2015). In harm’s way: Family separation, immigration enforcement programs and security on the US-Mexico border. J. on Migration & Hum. Sec., 3, 109.

Stevens, D., & Vaughan-Williams, N. (2016). Citizens and security threats: Issues, perceptions, and consequences beyond the national frame. British journal of political science, 46(1), 149-175.

Zureik, E., & Salter, M. (Eds.). (2013). Global surveillance and policing. Routledge.