In this Immigration essay example, we will offer some sample titles, topics, an outline, and structure that you can use in helping you write your essay. The start of any good essay is an interesting topic statement followed by a succinct and descriptive thesis statement. The thesis statement acts as the direction from which a reader takes when examining the body and conclusion. Body paragraphs should include a background on the topic and subtopics addressing each part of the thesis statement. The conclusion is a brief recap of what was covered throughout the paper.
Table of Contents
5. Essay Hook
7. Thesis Statement
7. Body of Essay
9. Works Cited
Immigration in the United States
Past and Present Immigration Patterns in the United States
Lost and Found: Immigration in the United States
Selected Title: The Birth of a Nation: Immigration
History of Immigration
Immigration Patterns in the United States
Effects of Immigration
B. Immigration Patterns
C. Social: Effects of Illegal Immigration
D. Political: Trump’s Stand Against Illegals
Immigration to the United States dates all the way back to the 1500’s with Roanoke Island and continued with British colonists, leading up to the South American, Central American, and Mexican waves of immigration that make up most immigration patterns today. Although the waves of immigration have changed throughout the history of the country, most of the same problems occur. From assimilation to a new country, to social pressures, and political reform, being an immigrant in the United States bring problems. This may be due to how immigrants are seen and the potential effects immigration causes to the American economy.
Immigration is a hot-button issue in the United States and always has been since its formation.
This essay will cover the roots of American immigration, patterns of immigration, social and political effects of illegal immigration, and the current handling of illegal immigrants by current President, Donald Trump.
Most of the early immigrants to the United States came from Great Britain. Information from the 1980’s United States Census shares that over 49 million Americans or 26.34% of the population claim English ancestry. Such statistics place British Americans as the biggest American ethnic group (Barkan, 2013). The reason why so many British people came to the then colonies was for religious freedom. Some felt persecuted in Great Britain for their religious beliefs and sought out a fresh start elsewhere. They saw the American colonies to begin anew and practice their beliefs without fear or worry (Barkan, 2013).
So many come to the United States now to escape persecution. It is interesting to see how the roots of immigration began with the same sentiments and notion. Although early waves of immigration began with Great Britain, it wasn’t until Roanoke that colonization efforts truly took hold. One of the earlier attempts at immigration, Roanoke, marked the beginning of colonization efforts. “Soon after the failed attempt to colonize Roanoke in 1585, the commercial classes and merchant companies used their growing political voice to promote immigration to America” (Barkan, 2013, p. 19). Companies like the Virginia Company as well as the Massachusetts Bay Company allowed for early colonists to voyage to North America and establish the first permanent English settlements. These settlements then attracted more immigrants, keeping the flow of immigration consistent for centuries. “These business-minded, entrepreneurial, profit-seeking colonies proved suitable for the American environment and perhaps set much of the tone for American culture” (Barkan, 2013, p. 19).
So, what began as a potential business venture, allowed for the expansion and continued growth of the American colonies. These colonies would then rebel against its mother country (Great Britain), and begin the American Revolution. The American Revolution heralded the birth of the United States Constitution and the country it formed thereafter. It also brought changes in immigration patterns that would represent the growing changes of each era in the United States. These eras began with ethnic diversity, then halted, and began again, showing the differences in policy with each change.
Before the American Revolution, the North American colonies experienced a great diversity of immigrants. “…and a number of those communities- German, Dutch, Swedish, Irish Protestants, and the other British, along with the extensive population of Africans- set the stage for the accommodation and acceptance of some populations…” (Barkan, 2013, p. 4). After the American Revolution, immigration to America became limited. This was due to the politics of the Napoleonic Wars (Powell, 2008).
These limitations prompted some groups to move to Canada. “The immigration of Scots from Scotland itself was redirected to Canada after the American Revolution. By the time the first Canadian census in 1871, Scots totaled 26 percent of the population, compared to 24 percent Irish and 20 percent English” (Powell, 2008, p. 265). What immigrants did make it to the United States were majority British and German. Although some Chinese immigrants made it to the United States thanks to railroad work, the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act restricted immigration from China. It was not until the opening of Ellis Island in 1892 that the country saw a greater influx of immigrants. This is because prior to Ellis Island, individual states regulated immigration, creating even tougher hurdles for immigrants of the time (Powell, 2008).
While Ellis Island made it easier for immigrants from Italy, Poland, and Ireland to come to the United States, the Chinese immigrants were excluded for over sixty years from 1882 to 1943. The act showed the level of racial tension in the United States and acted a precursor to future racial tensions in the country because of immigration. The United has had a long history of racial tension. Racial tension that sparked political and social action.
Beginning with the first Africans that were captured and put to work as slaves in the colonies, institutionalized racism remained a dark part of American politics and society for centuries. Americans saw Africans as property and resented the wave of Chinese immigrants that came for the promise of work in gold-rich California. The resentment of these new immigrants became so strong that during the 1850’s, an anti-Catholic, anti-immigrant political party formed to severely curb immigration. They succeeded in putting a presidential candidate up for election in 1956 (Millard Filmore) and were able to dominate the political climate of Massachusetts, generating a formidable power there. “Their most spectacular triumph was achieved in Massachusetts. In their very first election, Massachusetts Know-Nothings won the governorship and all state offices, every sear in the state senate, and all but 2 out of the 378 seats in the house of representatives” (Reichley, 2010, p. 188).
The Know-Nothings were able to plant the seeds from which the Exclusion Act developed and would take decades to break. The Chinese suffered racial injustice and continued restrictions for decades to come. It was not until 1965 that the United States began welcoming new immigrants from Asia and Latin America, sparking the kinds of immigration patterns seen today. The quota system that favored the inclusion of European immigrants to America, ended in 1965 and with it, came migration from Mexico and countries in Central and South America. These immigrants sparked a wave of illegal immigration that would set the stage for the effects felt and culminating during the 2016 presidential election.
Social: Effects of Illegal Immigration
To understand the negative sentiments associated with illegal immigrants, it is important to understand where they come from and how many come from each country. This can perhaps paint a picture of the illegal immigrant and why their presence may bother some American citizens. The main source of undocumented immigrants come from Mexico with an estimated 6.2 million. Guatemala has 723,000 illegal immigrants in the United States. El Salvador comes in at 465,000 and Honduras at 337,000. Other countries with a substantial number of illegal immigrants are China (268,000), India (267,000), Korea (198,000), and the rest (2.1 million) come from other countries (Yee, Davis, & Patel, 2017).
Because so many Mexicans are undocumented immigrants, the stereotypical image of the illegal immigrant is Mexican. Add to that the potential addition of criminals as part of the undocumented immigrant population, and it yields another layer of negative association to the stereotype. “The Migration Policy Institute has estimated that 820,000 of the 11 million unauthorized have been convicted of a crime. About 300,000, or less than 3 percent of the 11 million undocumented, have committed felonies” (Yee, Davis, & Patel, 2017). Criminal activity is associated with illegal immigrants. They managed to sneak into the country illegally and may be capable of other crimes. Many Americans that want illegal immigrants deported, note the identity theft crimes that illegal immigrants participate in each year. “The Social Security Administration estimated that in 2010, 1.8 million undocumented immigrants worked under a number that did not match their name” (Yee, Davis, & Patel, 2017).
Risk of identity theft, loss of jobs for the working class, and potential exposure to criminals has made the idea of illegal immigrants a main issue in the country. With each year passing, the number of undocumented immigrants increases. According to statistics 150,000 undocumented immigrants came to America versus one million legal immigrants. Those that come undocumented, the majority are Hispanic/Latino and Asian. “Of the 28.4 million foreign-born residents in the United States in 2000, Latinos accounted for 14.5 million; 7.2 million were Asian” (Cannon, 2010, p. 185). These illegals join the 11 million existing illegals residing in the United States, further creating a divide among the American public. That divide has propelled action in the government.
In the last decade, the White House has attempted to crack down on illegal immigration. “In 2005 the Boarder Protection, Anti-Terrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act was passed in the House of Representatives, but was defeated in the Senate. The bill would have made it a Federal crime to be an illegal immigrant in the United States” (Cannon, 2010, p. 185). Although the bill was not passed, it helped set the stage like the Know-Nothing Party did in the late 19th century, to breed anti-immigrant attitudes among American voters. Many of those that disliked the arrival of undocumented immigrants felt so because illegals took jobs for lower pay that would have gone to working class Americans. These Americans could find no source of employment and saw the illegals as a step back from economic prosperity. The attitudes festered for years until the arrival of political figures that would help these Americans turn their anger into real political power.
These political figures helped states like Arizona and Alabama crackdown on illegals, allowing police to check for illegal status. “After Arizona and Alabama passed strict immigration laws that required police to check the immigration status of anyone they suspected to be in the country illegally, anti-immigrant groups lost some of their momentum” (Fox, 2014). One such notable figure was U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton who approved such measures in a 2012 Supreme Court decision. The law was nicknamed ‘show me your papers’ provision and began as early as July 2010 with small changes to state immigrant smuggling laws.
These small changes were negligible at first. People at the time were happy with the outcome, stopping their anti-immigration rhetoric and rallies. However, a couple of years passed and people began to take the anti-immigration position again. Many that opposed illegal immigration felt illegals took jobs from them, were engaging in criminal activity, and took valuable government resources. So, the stage was set in 2016 for another anti-immigration movement to take shape. This time it would come as part of a presidential platform. This presidential platform set the stage not only for the 2016 Presidential election, but for many of the actions that took place in 2017 in the White House.
During the Presidential election of 2016, Donald Trump used illegal immigration as a platform from which to build his campaign. His famous ‘build a wall’ promise matched the negative sentiments felt by an angry and disheartened American public.
Building upon already established negative perceptions of illegal immigrants, Trump has manipulated these perceptions by echoing people’s prejudices. During a debate inside Cleveland’s Quicken Loans Arena, Trump made a point of stating: ‘They send the bad ones over, because they don’t want to pay for them, they don’t want to take care of them.’ Trump has also proposed to build a wall that will run the length of the Mexico/U.S. border in order to stop illegal immigration (Korostelina, 2016, p. 42).
Such campaign promises led him to gain victory in the Republic Primaries and eventually, win the Presidential election against Hillary Clinton. When Trump took office in January of 2017, his first 100 days marked a change in how the American government dealt with immigration.
Political: Trump’s Stand Against Illegals
Trump had won the election and prepared his cabinet so he could begin transforming the United States. At the top of his agenda was the deportation of illegal immigrants. Through the signing of two executive orders, Trump began the crackdown on illegals. The executive orders aimed to tighten border security as well as crack down on sanctuary cities allowing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to make more arrests. Since the first 100 days of President Trump’s term as President, over 41,300 arrests have been made. “…represents a 38 percent increase from the same time period in 2016, when ICE arrested 30,000 undocumented immigrants. ICE’s acting director attributed spike in arrests to ‘agents and officers given clear direction to focus on threats to public safety’” (Bendix, 2017). While arrests have increased by 13,000 arrests, the number of deportations have gone down compared to 2016 deportation rates around the same period.
The two executive orders signed by Trump in January of 2017 sought to increase the authority of U.S. immigration officials. The details of the first order include “he immediate construction of a physical wall on the southern border” between Mexico and the U.S., and calls for an additional 5,000 border patrol agents in the region” (Bendix, 2017), while the second order adds a limit to the ability of sanctuary cities to offer refuge to illegals. Trump did this by removing eligibility of these cities to receive federal funding if they did not cooperate with immigration authorities. Additionally, the second order “expands the number of undocumented immigrants who are considered “priorities for removal.” Under the new legislation, any undocumented immigrant who poses a “risk to public safety or national security” qualifies as a priority” (Bendix, 2017).
While the Obama Administration sought to prioritize the capture of criminal illegals, especially those involved in gangs and organized crime, Trump decided to widen the net and used such priority on most illegal immigrants. As to why many of these arrested illegals have not been deported, the backlog experienced by the courts serve as the main reason. With more cases added thanks to the new arrests, the immigration court system has slowed down, keeping deportations at a stand-still. Deportations have declined to 56,315, a twelve percent decrease from 2016 (Bendix, 2017).
Regardless of number of deportations or number of arrests, the Trump Administration has made it clear it wishes to end the problem of illegals in America. Trump supporters hail Trump’s decision to build the wall and arrest illegals. However, another key action by Trump was not so well favored. The ‘Muslim Ban’ Trump signed as an executive order, restricted travel to and from six predominantly Muslim countries (Newton, 2017).
The targeted countries were Iran, Yemen, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, and Iran (Newton, 2017). Critics of the ban believed the move was unconstitutional and the courts eventually removed the ban. This was regarded by many in the government and media as the most extreme act of anti-immigration in American history. Although the Chinese Exclusion Act was roughly the same in limiting certain people from entering the country, Trump’s executive order demonstrated the kind of fear and anger the American public feels because of immigration in a society that has supposedly freed itself from racism and societal outrage. If these events are what mark Trump’s presidency, it shows the level of instability in the United States. Furthermore, it marks a change in American beliefs and sentiments towards immigration.
Immigration has been an integral part of the United States since its colonial days. What started as a failed experiment at Roanoke became waves of new people each century. Although there was diversity in the days before the American Revolution, things changed after it. One notable change was the desire of the American government to exclude entire peoples from immigrating into the country. What started off as a Know-Nothing political party, took form as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Only in 1965 did immigration resume, full steam ahead.
With the new waves of immigrants came new problems. This was in the form of illegal immigrants. Many illegal immigrants came from what is known as Latin America (Mexico, Central, and South America). Mexico primarily, brought many illegal immigrants that reshaped the way immigrants are viewed by Americans and how the American government sought to alleviate the problem of illegal immigration.
What culminated in the election of President Trump, immigration took center stage as it represented the hardships, beliefs, and principles of many in the American public. Voters wanted more economic stability and saw illegal immigration as a deterrent to true American prosperity. President Donald Trump used this platform to gain the votes of sympathetic voters and parlayed that power into removing many illegal immigrants, even setting a never-before-seen ban on any immigrant desiring to come to or come back into the United States that came from certain countries. These times have brought back many difficult and troubling experiences for immigrants and set the stage for a new era in immigration.
This era seems rife with anger and cries of injustice on both sides. Has immigration become a nightmare for those looking to come to the United States? Time will tell. For now, immigration remains part of the American society. Immigration is still a way for people to come to a new land and get a second chance at a new life.
Immigration is a topic that offers a myriad of ways to address various subjects. Because immigration is different for every country, it is important to understand the background and current immigration patterns of any country you wish to cover. We hope this immigration essay offers you the tools to tackle other broad topics with ease and finesse. Who says some topics are too large to talk about? If you need any additional assistance, let us know. We’ll be happy to help.
References / Works Cited
Barkan, E. R. (2013). Immigrants in American history: Arrival, adaptation, and integration. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Bendix, A. (2017, May 17). Immigrant Arrests Are Up but Deportation Is Down Under Trump Administration – The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2017/05/under-trump-immigrants-arrests-are-up-but-deportation-is-down/527103/
Cannon, M. E. (2010). Social Justice Handbook: Small Steps for a Better World. IVP Books.
Fox, L. (2014, July 24). Anti-Immigrant Hate Coming From Everyday Americans Frustration with the current immigration system is coming from citizens, not hate groups. Retrieved from https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/07/24/anti-immigrant-hate-coming-from-everyday-americans
Korostelina, K. V. (2016). Trump effect. New York: Routledge.
Newton, C. R. (2017). Still Sanders: Understanding 2016 & Moving Forward.
Powell, J. (2008). Encyclopedia of North American immigration. New York: Infobase Publishing.
Reichley, J. (2010). Religion in American public life. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Yee, V., Davis, K., & Patel, J. K. (2017, March 7). Here’s the Reality About Illegal Immigrants in the United States – The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/03/06/us/politics/undocumented-illegal-immigrants.html?module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=Politics&action=keypress®ion=FixedLeft&pgtype=Multimedia
Latest APA Format (6th edition)
Latest MLA Format (8th edition)
Latest Chicago Format (16th edition)
Argumentative Essay on Immigration
Illegal immigration has been a problem for the United States for a long time. This phenomena is not new and thousands of illegal immigrants have come into US through either the Mexico border, the Pacific Ocean, or through many other ways. Some people have entered the country legally through a visit visa, but then have stayed illegally and are working in various places. Illegal immigration is a double edged sword; on the one hand it provide the local economy with cost benefits as the illegal immigrants are not paid so much, while they are more productive. On the other hand, these illegal immigrants do not pay taxes and their employers also do not pay their taxes. There are both pros and cons of illegal immigration and this paper shall take a look at some facts pertinent to illegal immigration in the United States.
“Every day thousands of illegals stream across the 2,500 miles of border with Mexico. According to the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, or INS, the total number of illegals in America from this source increases by 275,000 annually. Already the United States is host to an illegal population of 7 to 12 million, of whom the vast majority are Mexican or Hispanic in origin. These illegal and uninvited guests help themselves to jobs, education, welfare and unemployment compensation. The many whose wages are paid under the table pay little or no taxes. And they are easy prey for unscrupulous employers and politicians” (Hayes 2000)
The U.S. population primarily is growing as a result of births in the minority and immigrant communities. We do not like to think about it--as it is a political correctness problem--but there is stratification of labor, mostly along education lines, where the tough jobs in agriculture, manufacturing, and services are taken by those without recourse into the white-collar world of employment. Especially when these low paying jobs do not require language ability, immigrants historically have jumped at these opportunities as a way to get their foot in the door. The U.S.-born unemployed do not think first about having just any job to help plant their feet. They first think about what their wages will be. If you are here illegally, you clearly have a competitive advantage (Howell 2006).
Most of the Americans and the American officials are of the opinion that illegal immigration is bad for the country and it should be stopped completely. The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) is a law in the United States of America that pertains to the policies and regulations regarding employment. This law was enacted in 1986 for various reasons, which includes the fact that many illegal employees work in the United States. The two main requirements of the IRCA include: “(1) to hire only persons authorized to work in the United States and (2) to not discriminate on the basis of citizenship status or national origin” (LMD 1992). In order to be eligible to work in the United States, the workers must complete an I-9 form and must be able to prove their authorization to work in the United States to their employers. “Employers may not refuse to consider all qualified persons with work authorization, whether citizen or non-citizen. Employers must accept any document listed in the INS Handbook for Employers, and may not arbitrarily specify an INS document, or require additional documents. Employers may not refuse to hire a qualified worker whose employment authorization expires at a later date. IRCA imposes back pay and severe penalties on employers who commit immigration-related employment discrimination” (LMD 1992). I am for this immigration reform as I believe that illegal employment is a drain on the economy of the United States.
There are more than 10 million undocumented workers (excluding their families) in the United States (White). Most of these illegal workers are concentrated in California and Texas, although their presence can be felt all over the country. About three quarters of these illegal immigrants come to the United States after crossing the US/Mexico border. Many of these illegal immigrants are hired by US employers as undocumented workers and this is done because they can be hired at a pay less than minimum wage. Most of these workers are hired to work in the agricultural, manufacturing, and construction industries, or in backroom jobs. These workers are not given any kind of health care or any other benefits (White). These jobs are mostly opened illegally by US employers in order to save up on taxes and also save up on their costs by paying the workers less than minimum wage. It is for this reason that I believe it important for the immigration reform to be in place as it makes it harder for the employers to cheat the government out of the taxes etc.
One other benefit that can be derived from the IRCA is that of the social costs related with illegal immigration into the United States. When the illegal immigrants enter America, they do so without any papers or any authorization. This means that there is no record of where they come from or what sort of a background they have. They might be infected with a hundred diseases, such as polio, tuberculosis, etc. These diseases can spread and cause a lot of problems for the American citizens. Other than that, there are more costs that are added for a state as it has to pay for the education etc for these illegal immigrants. “In an already under funded programs they give these services a more heavy burden to deal with. Republicans have reached agreement among themselves on legislation designed to combat illegal immigration (Carney 1996). But with their package facing delaying tactics from Senate Democrats and a veto from the president, they finished the week of Sept. 2 uncertain of their next move” (Website).
It would be useful to consider the downside of implementing strict immigration laws. If the labor market were not being filled by illegal immigrants crossing the Mexican border, these positions would have to be filled by someone else. If we were to bring more agricultural and service workers into the U.S. through a regularized process, the resulting body of immigrants would be less Mexican and more Arab, Muslim, South Asian, and African. For those who want an idea of how this would impact American society, take a look at Europe. This is an issue of culture, language, and religion. Author Samuel Huntington (Who Are We?) and others have argued that Mexican culture is not readily compatible with the Anglo-Protestant culture under which the U.S. has prospered. This may be true. but it certainly is more compatible than Iraqi culture (Howell 2006).
If the Mexicans were not coming in illegally, we would have to process--and keep track of--all of them. What would the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS, the successor agency to the Immigration and Naturalization service under the new Department of Homeland Security) have to look like to process the 500 workers who are sneaking into the country illegally on a daily basis? What would it cost? There roughly are 11,000,000,000 illegal immigrants in the U.S. By any process other than deporting them all, there will be a substantial increase in the size of the government agencies designed to monitor them (Howell 2006).
By making such an issue of illegal immigrants from Mexico, we are discouraging all immigrants about life in the U.S., including those that we need desperately. The issue is plugging up the immigration system for applicants who have math and science skills. Many claim that the education system is being overburdened by the children of illegal immigrants. Yet, such skills have not--at least over the last 20 years--been produced by that same system, forcing us to import our technological capability from India, East Asia, and elsewhere (Howell 2006).
One might argue that the immigrants are people after all and that they should not be discriminated against even if they come illegally into the country. A lot of public controversy has been sparked on the discourse of affirmative action, which is about the discrimination of the immigrants in the workplace. This started as a period of “passionate debate that began around 1972 and tapered off after 1980, and the second indicating a resurgence of debate in the 1990s leading up to the Supreme Court's decision in the summer of 2003 upholding certain kinds of affirmative action” (Fullinwider 2005). Other than this, there have been two paths that the development, defense, and contestation of preferential affirmative action have taken. “One has been legal and administrative as courts, legislatures, and executive departments of government have made and applied rules requiring affirmative action. The other has been the path of public debate, where the practice of preferential treatment has spawned a vast literature, pro and con” (Fullinwider 2005).
Many people argue that the immigrants are usually skilled labor and they help increase the local production of the United States. Others also argue that when the businesses pay them lower than minimum wage, their costs go down, which means that the costs of production as well as the prices goes down, and these help the citizens of the United States. It is also argued that the immigrants tend to send their US dollars outside America to their families, and this strengthens the value of the dollar, making it more valuable, thereby making the economy of US stronger.
Yet, we find that these benefits are far outweighed by the costs that the illegal immigrants bear on the US. Many immigrants have felt that they are being discriminated against in the workplace for one or more of the various kinds of discriminatory practices that occur within various organizations. Many of these employees are women who believe that they have been discriminated based on their sex. The Revised Order of 1972 affected a change that included women among the “protected classes” whose “underutilization” demanded the setting of “goals” and “timetables” for “full utilization” (Graham 1990). There are some theories that are presented in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that pertain to discrimination in employment, even if the employee is an illegal immigrant. The IRCA changes all that. An illegal immigrant cannot be considered an employee under the IRCA, which automatically takes care of the discrimination problem.
It can be concluded that the immigration reforms are a good practice for both the immigrants, and more importantly, for the US. The illegal immigrants pose many problems for our country and they should not be allowed to enter in the first place. But since it is very hard to implement total security, steps should be taken to reduce the illegal immigrant inflow into our country and the first step is to implement immigration reform. Much of what these people earn in the US is sent to their homes in their own countries and the US economy is deprived of their taxes. By staying in the US, they are spending each second doing an illegal act as just their presence inside the US borders is an illegal act.
Many people tend to think that eradicating illegal immigration is impossible and that it can never work. This is not true. Illegal immigration can be repealed if the government takes the proper measures. While there is no painless magic answer, illegal migration can be significantly reduced with a few effective measures. Some of those measures require money; some require political will; many can be accomplished by the President without new legislation. Adopted as part of a comprehensive approach, these measures will be effective. Adopted selectively, they will fail. As a first step, however, current law and regulations must be clarified. Employers are caught between competing legal mandates when hiring non-citizens; aliens with only a tenuous claim to presence in the U.S. remain here for years under the color of law; and some government officials do not know whether they are obliged to report information to or withhold it from the INS. Congress and the regulators must simplify legal requirements so that the average person, citizen or alien, can know what the rules are (Lempres 1994).
Interdiction can be effective because of the nature of the flow of illegal migration. Over 95 per cent of illegal border crossers come through Mexico, where the terrain funnels traffic into several crossing points. By far the busiest crossing point in the nearly 6,000 miles of land border is the 13 miles near San Diego. Over 40 per cent of the Border Patrol's total interdictions occur in that 13-mile strip of land. Moreover, the Border Patrol estimates that over 90 per cent of its total apprehensions occur in just 100 miles of border segments. The concentration of illegal traffic means that interdiction efforts can be focused for greater effectiveness. Physical structures such as lights, fences, and anti-automobile barriers can be placed along the high-traffic crossing points. Without new legislation, the Administration can build these structures and add Border Patrol officers at the hot spots (Lempres 1994).
Other than that, there has been a lot of prosecutions regarding illegal immigration over the past few years. But the government is not merely prosecuting illegal immigrants for immigration offenses; it is reinvigorating its investigation and prosecutorial efforts against corporate America as well. Various corporate scenarios in the United States show that corporate America currently faces in confronting federal prosecutions. Congress first deputized corporate America into controlling the flow of illegal immigration at our nation's borders in 1986--by making it illegal for employers to knowingly hire, or knowingly retain after hiring, illegal immigrants, as well as to fail to comply with the employment verification requirements--and then subjecting employers to stiff civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance. Congress further deputized corporate America in 1996, and subjected corporate America to even higher financial stakes, when it made certain immigration offenses predicate offenses in RICO, and thereby opened the doors to suits from plaintiffs' lawyers for treble damages for having knowingly hired at least ten undocumented workers in a twelve-month period. Given the increasingly high stakes for employers, it is imperative that they expend the resources now to take the preventive measures outlined in this article. To do less will only perpetuate exposure to unnecessary and costly risk (Ciobanu and Green 2006).
Carney, Dan, (1996). " Social Policy " Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, 54, (36): 2531.
Ciobanu, Ileana M. and Thomas C. Green. (2006). “Deputizing - and Then Prosecuting - America's Businesses in the Fight against Illegal Immigration,” American Criminal Law Review, 43, (3): 1203+.
Fullinwider, Robert, (2005). “Affirmative Action”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2005 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2005/entries/affirmative-action/
Graham, Hugh Davis, (1990), The Civil Rights Era: Origins and Development of National Policy 1960-1972 (New York: Oxford University Press): 413.
Hayes, Ted, (September 25, 2000 ). “Illegal Immigration Threatens U.S. Sovereignty, Economy and Culture,” Insight on the News, 16, (36): 46
Howell, Llewellyn d. (July 2006). “Ironies of Illegal Immigration,” USA Today, 135, (2734): 19
Lempres, Michael T. (1994). “Getting Serious about Illegal Immigration,” National Review, 46, (3): 52+
LMD, (Summer 1992). “How to Avoid Immigration-Related Employment Discrimination,” Labor Management Decisions, 2, (2)
Website, “Immigration Problem in the US,” Online, http://www.cyberessays.com/Politics/32.htm
White, Deborah, “Analysis of Immigration Reform Proposal,” Liberal Politics: US, Available Online: http://usliberals.about.com/od/immigration/i/BushImmiReform.htm