Introduction
The subject of immigration, which falls within the purview of the US federal government has for long been a highly contested issue. It has always taken the form of debate whenever it is mentioned. The National Conference for State Legislatures (2018) pinpoints that immigration and its attendant laws are a federal responsibility as is lucidly stipulated in the US Constitution. Within the American Constitution, the immigration issue is addressed as a Congressional mandate as a uniform naturalization rule (National Conference for State Legislatures, 2018). With the Congress wielding the order in setting up immigration laws, albeit, with the support of local and state legislative bodies, the implementation of immigration laws remains a controversial issue. In this regard, this paper argues that why the enforcement of immigration laws by federal agencies has been met with reluctance is due to the impact of various political and economic forces discussed below.
Examining the Political and Economic Forces Limiting the Implementation of Immigration Laws
It is common knowledge that the existing legal framework guiding the formulation and implementation of immigration law is affected by various forces. Of these forces, the safest ones are economical and political ones as these arguably affect the day-to-day running of the US federal and state governments. As is postulated by Makowsky and Stratmann (2014), political forces such as incentives initiated by vote-maximizing politicians are an excellent example of such forces affecting immigration policy implementation. The election of President Donald Trump is argued to have undertaken a series of hurdles for immigrants who are finding it more than challenging to enter the US even under existing immigration laws. The tendency for the president to issue executive orders, which arguably are at conflict with the existing framework of immigration laws has thus continued to demean their legitimacy and application. In this light, political forces are seriously determining whether immigration laws are implemented as they are or whether they are substituted with a more direct or authoritative approach. The Trump regime is highly skeptical of the ‘less-actionable' Obama administration, which it has consistently blamed for weak immigration laws National Conference for State Legislatures, (2018). As is argued by Newman (2013), the regime that is elected into the Federal office is highly instrumental in deciding whether immigration law enforcement will work or not. To this extent, it becomes manifest that political forces have arguably an enormous preponderance in determining the implementation of immigration laws.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
It is a well-known truth that immigration and its concurrent framework of applicable policies fall within the ambit of the federal government. One crucial political factor influencing its implementation is that it falls within particular organs. The National Conference for State Legislatures, (2018) lucidly postulates that as a federal issue, it is highly influenced by the decisions of the US. Supreme Court, at least five executive agencies and the US President. Such is the case because the decision over the exact number of people to be allowed to enter the country is considered increasingly important for both economic and socio-political reasons. Budgetary constraints in the cost of settling refugees, economic migrants, and among others, illegal immigrants have as well economically affected the implementation of immigration laws in the country.
An interplay of such economic and political factors is notably considered to be the cogs in the wheels of deciding the direction that implementation of immigration law takes. For instance, the executive agencies are noted to be increasingly concerned with the relatively high costs of coping with the refugee influx, mainly from Syria as from 2011 (Janus, 2010). However, the contribution of refugees and other immigrants to state economies cannot be overlooked. According to the National Conference for State Legislatures (2018), it is arguably the reason implementation of stringent federal-government executed immigration policies has progressed quite gradually. Many Democrat policymakers who arguably sympathize with the immigrants have also been noted to have been instrumental in instigating a relatively less disempowering approach to most immigrants. It should, nonetheless, be noted that they are argued to have initiated a relatively weak immigrant law implementation agenda in favor of human rights and humanitarian grounds (Newman, 2013). It is for this reason that it becomes relatively easier to realize how regime change during the Obama (Democratic) and now Trump (Republican) presidency has shifted from a less stringent into a more focused anti-immigration stance. Galvanizing his election campaign upon the promise of ‘making America great again,' incumbent Trump is noted to have risen to power via a concerted anti-immigration stance. Taming illegal immigration, primarily through the US-Mexico border, became a policy target for President Trump. It highlights the influence of a regime on immigration policy implementation (National Conference for State Legislatures, 2018). It follows that the government and its power politics are influencing the destination of immigration policy in the country.
Particular policy initiatives with an economic background also have a fundamental role to play in shaping the implementation of the country’s federal immigration laws. One such action is the 1990-instituted Immigration Investor program whose aim is to attract foreign investors besides creating jobs in mainly rural areas (Janus, 2010). While the initiative’s institutionalization is intended at attracting more foreign investment into the country, it also simultaneously arguably slows the application of immigration laws. Moreover, such economic programs and their intended benefit of increasing job creation in high unemployment areas highly reduce the speed of implementing immigration laws. From this standpoint, it is worth arguing that economic initiatives play a fundamental role in shaping the direction of implementing immigration laws or policies.
It is also worth noting that the federal and state immigration systems and their cooperation plays a crucial economical-political role in deciding the implementation of immigration policy. For instance, Makowsky and Stratmann (2014) observe that individual federal legislators are profoundly disturbed by the revelation that immigrants are seriously competing with the nationals in the same labor market. While such a force reveals an element of politicking, it dies at least in some way influence the direction of immigration policies in the country. States are also noted to have made immigration laws more flexible by reinforcing the necessity of immigration through their coordination with the Department of Homeland Security (Newman, 2013). It is argued that most states are seeking to streamline ways through, which immigrant professionals can quickly obtain professional licenses for purposes of improving local economies (Janus, 2010). While this strategic interest by states may go against the stringent already-existing federal immigration policy framework, its impact is most significant when it comes to the reluctance in implementing it.
Conclusion
The paper examined economic and political forces influencing the implementation of federal-government instituted immigration policies. The literature so reviewed reveal that economic and political forces confluence of changing the direction of application of such laws. Among the forces include the political regime of the time, strategic interests of states cutting across economic benefits and programs such as the Immigration investor program. The Obama and Trump regimes are noted to have influenced immigration policy differently with Trump taking a sterner stance against immigration. The Obama regime on, which human rights inclinations were laced meanwhile was more accommodating to immigrants. It is the interplay of such forces that influences the implementation of immigration policies in the country.
References
Janus, A. L. (2010). The influence of social desirability pressures on expressed immigration attitudes. Social Science Quarterly , 91 (4), 928-946.
Makowsky, M. D., & Stratmann, T. (2014). Politics, unemployment, and the enforcement of immigration law. Public Choice , 160 (1-2), 131-153.
National Conference for State Legislatures. (2018). U.S. Immigration: A Primer for State Policymakers. Congressional Research Service . Retrieved from: http://www.ncsl.org/Portals/1/HTML_LargeReports/ImmigrationPrimer.htm
Newman, B. J. (2013). Acculturating contexts and Anglo opposition to immigration in the United States. American Journal of Political Science , 57 (2), 374-390.
