How Immigration Laws Have Changed in Response to Terrorist Attacks - Assignment Example

Your judge (and former congressional representative) has now been appointed an administrator in the new Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. She needs to know how immigration laws have changed in response to terrorist attacks. Consider the changes in enforcement with respect to immigrants, non-immigrants and illegal aliens. Are these changes justified as a matter of policy and ethics? How does this change Americas image of a "melting pot" of nationalities? To: From: Date: Subject: Homeland Security. The 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World trade center towers had the affect of bringing change in the immigration laws of United States of America. The perpetrators of the 9/11 terrorist attacks were illegal aliens. They had succeeded in circumventing the immigration laws of the country. Before committing this horrific act the terrorists were living in United States. They had also bypassed the radar of the immigration law enforcement agency [Nacos, Brigitte L. (2010)] . This called for a change in the immigration laws of United States of America so as to make them more stringent. The first major change was that the number of federal agencies supervising the issues of immigration laws and green cards was increased to include the Department of Homeland Security, Department of State, Department of Justice, Department of Labor and the Department of Health and Human Services. There are about 185 different types of American visas. But the two main categories of United States visas are: 1) Non-immigrant visa which is for temporary visits like business, tourism and studying. 2) Immigrant visa which is for people wishing to be permanent residents of United States of America without any time limitation. Before the September 11 attacks, the main agency that was responsible for the enforcement of immigration laws concerning green cards and temporary visas was the Immigration and Naturalization Services. The screening process for those applying for business and tourist visas ( the non-immigrants ) has become very stringent after the September 11 attacks. This has been due to heightened security concerns after 9/11 and to ensure that holders of these non-immigrant visas do not abuse their entry into United States to seek employment and illegal residency. The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Bureau screens the applications for temporary non-immigrant visas. If it approves the application, then the applicant must apply for the receipt of his visa in the consulate of the American Embassy in his home country. On making entry to the United States of America, the non-immigrant visa holders is finally screened by the Customs and Border Police (CBP ) of the United States of America. They too can prevent the holder of the non-immigrant visa from entering the country if they perceive any illegality or threat to security. The process regarding temporary work visas has become even more stringent. Temporary work visa requests are now entertained only for those work positions that require high technical or educational skills or for those jobs where there is a lack of natural American workers. ENHANCED BORDER SECURITY AND VISA ENTRY REFORM ACT, 2002 The Enhanced border security and visa entry reform act, 2002 was passed in the aftermath of 9/11 terrorist attacks. It was signed into an act by President George W. Bush, eight months after the terrorist attacks, on May 14, 2002. The Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act, 2002 was passed by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in both the houses of the Congress. This act is the representation of the most extensive response of the American state to the terrorist threats that became so real after the 9/11 attacks. The Enhanced Border Security and Visa Reform Act, 2002 stipulates that Immigration and Naturalization service should make inter-operable all its internal databases so that all information about an alien can be accessed by the different concerned agencies in a single search. It also stipulates that Federal law agencies should share data on aliens with the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the State Department (section 201 of the Act) . The Act also requires that all travel and entry documents issued to the aliens should be machine-readable, tamper resistant and should include a standard biometric identifier. The Section 101 of the Enhanced Borders Security and Visa Reforms Act authorized the funding for 800 new Immigration and Naturalization Service ( INS ) inspections personnel and 800 new INS investigations personnel between 2003 and 2006. Section 102 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Reforms Act, 2002, authorized a $ 150 million appropriation for enhancement in technological capabilities so as to improve border security and facilitate the flow of commerce and cross-border traffic. Section 103 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Reforms Act, 2002, has increased the fee to be charged for the issuance of machine-readable visa. This has been set at higher of $ 65 or the actual cost of the service. Section 103 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Reforms Act, 2002, also authorizes the state to charge $ 10 as surcharge for the issuance of machine-readable visa in a non-readable passport. Section 501 of the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Reforms Act, 2002, requires the Attorney General to establish an electronic means to monitor and verify the following: 1) The issuance of documentation of acceptance to foreign students by approved educational institutions and exchange visitor programs. 2) The issuance of visa to a foreign student or exchange visitor. This can be an F or M non-immigrant visa to foreign students and a J non-immigration visa to a foreign exchange visitor. 3) The admission into the United States of America of the student or the foreign exchange visitor. HOMELAND SECURITY ACT, 2002. The homeland security act was enacted into law in December, 2002. This law created the Department for Homeland Security. Many government agencies whose functions related to security were consolidated into one agency. This was meant to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of these agencies [White, J. R. (2004)]. The United States Immigration and Naturalization Service ( INS ) was transformed into the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services in the new Homeland Security Department. REAL ID ACT, 2005 The REAL ID Act, 2005 was enacted on May 11, 2005. This act restricts illegal immigrants or immigrants who cannot prove their legal status or are without social security numbers, from obtaining driver’s licenses in United States of America. This has the effect of disabling many illegal immigrants from working and from obtaining liability insurance. This has also put some difficulties for the holders of J-1 and H-1 visas. If their visa expires before their legal stay then they need to travel back to their home country for the renewal of the visa so that they can renew their driving license. Enforcement of Immigration Laws after 9/11: Post 9/11 the enforcement of the immigration laws of United States in relation to immigrants, non-immigrants and aliens has become more stringent and effective. There is increased denial and revocation of visas for admission to foreign visitors. Sanctions against those who employ illegal residents have increased after 9/11. The number of instances of raids at workplaces to detect illegal immigrants and residents increased drastically after the terrorist attacks. Self-reporting requirements have also increased considerably. Notification requirements for local authorities of the presence of foreign citizens have increased. Criminal prosecutions of illegal immigrants too have increased drastically. By the year 2004, prosecutions on cases relating to immigration violations replaced drug crimes as the leading category of federal prosecutions. The number of prosecutions for immigration offences had more than doubled during the period of 2000 to 2004. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement Authority was created after 9/11 within the new department of Homeland Security. A significant portion of the federal resources have now been diverted to the investigation of cases where immigration laws have been violated. The admissions of legal permanent immigrants into United States reached a peak in the year 2000. This was 1.5 million. Besides this, 39 million temporary non-immigrants entered United States of America in the year 2000 [Daniel Yankelovich, 2006]. After the 9/11 attacks, new restrictions were imposed on immigration into United States of America. As a result between the years 2000 to 2004, immigration into United States dropped significantly to levels of less than one million annually. The news laws enacted after 9/11 have also made it mandatory that the visa be stamped in the country of origin. Prior to the 9/11 attacks, H, E, L and a few other visas could be re-issued in United States by sending the passports to the State Department. This is no longer possible after the September 11 attacks except in exceptional cases like diplomatic passports. For the renewal of visas, the applicant now has to apply in US consulates outside the United States of America. Another change was that a person could no longer change to F-1 (student) visa while in United States on a tourist, business or any other visa besides F-1. To convert to F-1 visa, separate proceedings need to be undertaken. Are these changes justified as a matter of policy and ethics? These changes in the immigration laws of United States of America were justified on the grounds of security. Citizens of Islamic nations were put to more rigorous tests regarding their backgrounds and their intended reasons for visiting the United States of America. This may sound as an instance of religious profiling and statistical discrimination. But given the context of post 9/11 and the reality of global terror, these measures were justified. They were needed to ensure the safety of the US citizens. These stringent measures relating to immigration laws are one of the main reasons behind the success of United States in preventing any major terrorist strike after the September 11 attacks. The policy behind the immigration laws of United States has always been to discourage illegal immigration and to encourage legal immigration of immigrants who can contribute productively and creatively to the American economy and nation. So the changes made after the 9/11 attacks are consistent with the fundamental policy that always guided the United States Immigration laws. Much before the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Supreme Court, in the case of United States versus Martinez-Fuerte (1976), had allowed the United States Border Police to set up permanent or fixed checkpoints on highways leading to and from the Mexican border so as to prevent illegal immigration from Mexico. The court had held that it was in no way a violation of the Fourth Amendment. Even before that in the case Korematsu versus United States (1944), the United States Supreme Court had held that the interests of national security were above the individual rights and rights of civil liberty. The stringent immigration laws may not be inconsistent with the principles of globalization which encourage free movement of people, goods and capital. Freer movement of goods and capital has become a reality, but free movement of people is still more of an ideal. No country in the world currently allows free movement of people across its borders [Julia Preston, 2007] . The stringent enforcement of immigration laws has the affect of discouraging incentives for illegal immigration. Prospective immigrants now have more incentives to go through the legal procedure and to wait for their turn to gain entry into the United States of America. Ethically also these changes are justified because they are in the interests of the American citizens. One theory of ethics is utilitarianism which is about promoting the greatest good of the greatest number of people. The changes in the immigration laws of United States of America are ethically justified on the grounds of utilitarianism. They are intended to promote the greatest good of the greatest number of American citizens. How does this change Americas image of a "melting pot" of nationalities? The melting pot is a metaphor for describing the ways in which members from different cultures, races and ethnicities melt together in a seeming heterogeneous society to create a harmonious and homogeneous society. The melting pot was originally used to describe the American nation which is a nation of immigrants. America is a nation of immigrants. Immigrants from around the world came to America and became its naturalized citizens. The more stringent American immigration laws after 9/11 and their stricter enforcement will in no way affect America’s image of a melting point of nationalities. America’s image is that of a melting point of nationalities and not of a melting point of illegal immigrants. America’s success as a melting point of nationalities and ethnicities has been because of the principles of civil liberty and individual freedom and respect enshrined in the constitution of America [Darmer, K. M.; Baird, R. M. and Rosenbaum, S. E., eds. (2004)]. These principles allow the frictionless melting of the different cultures and ethnicities into the American nation. Even after September 11, American citizens have generally favored a steady flow of immigrants into the American nation. Even after the tougher immigration laws America continues to be an open economy when it comes to immigration. It has been a hot-bed of immigration of skilled workers, especially in the software and technology-intensive sector, from around the world. Conclusion: Post 9/11, immigration into America for all kinds of immigrants and non-immigrants has become more difficult. The number of processes has increased and these processes are now implemented more stringently. More than the enactments of new laws and regulations concerning immigration, it is about the more stringent implementation of the existing laws. But this stringent enforcement was necessary because of the increased threat to security of the American citizens and the looming specter of global terrorism fuelled by religious fundamentalism. It does not affect the image of America as a melting pot of cultures because the success of this melting pot rests on the principles of civil liberties and individual freedom enshrined in the constitution of United States of America which enable the frictionless integration of the members of different nationalities and ethnicities. References: White, J. R. (2004). Defending the Homeland: Domestic Intelligence, Law Enforcement, and Security. Belmont CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Nacos, Brigitte L. (2010). Terrorism and Counterterrorism. New York NY: Longman/Pearson. Darmer, K. M.; Baird, R. M. and Rosenbaum, S. E., eds. (2004). Civil Liberties vs. National Security in a Post 9/11 World. Amherst NY: Prometheus Books. Julia Preston, 2007, In Increments, Senate Revisits Immigration Bills, New York Times. Daniel Yankelovich, 2006 , The Tipping Points, Foreign Affairs. Kathy Kiel, 2007, Public favors giving illegal immigrants in USA a break, USA Today. Howard, R.D., Forest, J.J. and Moore, J.C. (2006). Homeland security and terrorism: Readings and interpretations. New York: McGraw-Hill Hulnick, A. S. (2004). Keeping the US Safe. Westport, CT: Praeger. Sauter, M. and Carafano, J.J. (2005). Homeland security: A complete guide to understanding , preventing and terrorism. New York: McGraw-Hill Read More