Illegal immigration is one of the main problems the United States has been faced with for a very long time now. Every year, the nation witnesses hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants from varying regions of the world stream into the country. Illegal immigration into the US has borne some negative impacts to the nation despite government efforts to address this issue. Although the Federal government is tasked with the responsibility of enforcing immigration policies, it has significantly failed in this field. Failure of the Federal to effectively enforce immigration laws has led to the incorporation of states and local governments’ in the enforcement of immigration laws. However, this collaboration has not been of much help as well. With no clear directives defining the specific roles of the Federal government, states, and local governments, a new arrangement of enforcement of immigration policies has risen. This system, described as a jerry-rigged piece of intersecting and conflicting authorities at its best, has led to a lot of challenges.
First, immigration federalism has led to violation of civil rights and liberties of non-citizens. Sub-national agencies that are involved in immigration law enforcement are alluded to lack the adequate training in national immigration laws. This has put fixed such agencies in such a position where they occasionally but unknown to them, contravene the constitutional rights of immigrants (Chávez, 2013). Agencies, especially police departments, in their quest to curb unlawful immigration into America, often conduct stop overs aimed at assessing immigration statuses of non-citizens. It has been reported that several non-citizens in the United States have been discriminated against during such operations. Individuals found guilty of victimizing non-citizens of America are not only infringing the provisions of the Fifth Amendment (“No person…be deprived of life, liberty of property without due process of the law), but also committing unlawful acts as per the stipulations of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Newton, 2015). Apart from violating the stipulations of the Fifth Amendment, transgression of the civil rights and liberties of the immigrants is also Biblically informed. The Bible says,
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
“And if a stranger dwells with you in your land, you shall not mistreat him. The stranger who dwells among you shall be to you as [a]one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus 19: 33-34, The New King James Version).
To protect the rights of immigrants therefore, all immigration agents found guilty of discriminating against immigrants should be charged and fined or even imprisoned.
The second problem that has been linked to immigration federalism according to Chávez is the issue of racial profiling and alienation of immigrant communities. Alienation results from fear that is likely to build between local police and undocumented immigrants. They are less likely to report crime cases to the police for the fear of identification and subsequent deportation (Chávez, 2013). The immigrants also fear for their victimization due to mistrust between them and the police. On the other hand, use of local government agencies could also cause racial profiling. Several cases of racial discrimination against immigrants have been reported, for example, bearing a Mexican appearance almost guarantees a stop-over and a thorough search by the police (Chávez, 2013). Racial profiling is a violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. Additionally, racial profiling and alienation resulting from immigration federalism is also against the word of God. Deuteronomy 10: 18-19 (The New King James Version) says that, “He administers justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the stranger, giving him food and clothing. Therefore love the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.” The answer to these Biblically inaccurate consequences of immigration federalism is by offering adequate training to police officers handling immigration issues. Arrests and fines are also viable options for officer who racially abuse and cause alienation of immigrants.
Enhancing the arguments above, immigration federalism has also led to increase in local and state government expenditures. Enforcement costs are incurred during incarceration of unlawful immigrants as well as compensation of the participants of undocumented immigration enforcement (Chávez, 2013). This means, that every year, the governments set aside a huge chunk of the budget. To reduce spending a lot of money, the government should design a nationwide strategy to address the issue of immigration. Integration of the operations seeking to thwart illegal immigration will help keep operational costs low (Rodriguez, 2017).
Conclusion
Case study of “Immigration federalism: The case of immigration enforcement by non-federal agencies,” discloses that enforcement of immigration laws should be the responsibility of the Federal government. The government should therefore strive to offer sufficient training to all personnel involved in dealing with immigration issues. Failure to do so may present several challenges as discussed before. These challenges include racial profiling, violation of civil rights and unreasonably exorbitant expenditures. It is also important to note that these challenges of immigration federalism not only violate sections of the US constitution, but are also against Biblical teachings.
References
Chávez, E.R. (2103). Immigration Federalism: The Case of Immigration Enforcement by Non-Federal Agencies. Hinckley Journal of Politics, 14. Retrieved October 24, 2018.
Newton, L. (2015). Immigration federalism as ideology: Lessons from the states. Laws, 2015 (4), pp. 729-754. DOI: 10.3390/laws4040729
Rodriguez, C. (2017). Enforcement, integration, and the future of immigration federalism. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 5 (2), 509-5340.
