A Welcome Call for Reform of the Federal Immigration Enforcement Programs in the United States

The University of California, Berkeley Law School produced a new report - "Borders, Jails, and Jobsites: An Overview of Federal Immigration Enforcement Programs in the U.S." - that analyzes the difficult policy issues surrounding immigration enforcement. The report focuses mainly on the two administrative agencies primarily responsible for immigration enforcement: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), both under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

"Borders, Jails, and Jobsites" provides a broad overview of border enforcement, immigration enforcement in the interior, workplace enforcement and detention. Within each area, the report makes informed and intelligent recommendations for reform.

Perhaps most concerning are the unintended consequences of immigration enforcement programs in the United States. The root of the problem appears to be the lack of clarity regarding the states' role in implementing and enforcing federal immigration law. For example, in a policy reversal, the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice issued a memorandum in 2002 stating that states have "inherent authority" rather than "delegated power" to enforce federal law related to immigration. The memo has caused confusion, as some states - like Arizona - embrace their inherent authority, while others consider the memo flawed and unsupported in law. Until the role of states is clarified by the federal government, the majority of immigration enforcement programs will continue to foster distrust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement. Hopefully federal and local governments will begin to implement some of the recommendations suggested in this recent report.

Bookmark this post with:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
•