Immigration News Blog

Monday, June 15, 2015

Authorized Status, Limited Returns: The Labor Market Outcomes of Temporary Mexican Workers

Authorized Status, Limited Returns: The Labor Market Outcomes of Temporary Mexican Workers

If temporary foreign worker programs are to be a viable alternative to unauthorized immigration, temporary work visas must appeal to potential unauthorized immigrants and must reduce the risk of abuse that workers in these programs encounter. Currently, visa restrictions tying temporary foreign workers to a single employer undermine the economic opportunities available to these workers.


Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Debunking the Myth of the Job-Stealing Immigrant

Debunking the Myth of the Job-Stealing Immigrant

Even those of us who favor a path to citizenship are not going far enough, because we are mired in zero-sum thinking.


Friday, February 06, 2015

The Shame of America’s Family Detention Camps

From left, Vanessa Sischo, Christina Brown and Barbara Hines in Karnes, Tex., where they have been advocating on behalf of detained immigrants.
From left, Vanessa Sischo, Christina Brown and Barbara Hines in Karnes, Tex., where they have been advocating on behalf of detained immigrants.
The Obama administration’s draconian policy toward female refugees and their children has sown misery on the border — and pushed volunteer lawyers to the breaking point.


Thursday, January 22, 2015


European Commission


Data from March 2014. Most recent data: Further Eurostat information, Main tables and Database.
This article presents recent statistics on the acquisition of citizenship in the European Union (EU).
In 2012, 818 100 people obtained citizenship of an EU-28 Member State, an increase of 4.0 % compared with 2011; More people had acquired the citizenship of an EU Member State than in any other year during the period from 2002 to 2011. The main contribution to the increase at EU level came from United Kingdom (+16 300), followed by Ireland (+14 300) and Sweden (+13 500). The increase in Ireland, however, is a consequence of the efforts in the past two years to reduce the backlog of citizenship applications.
Most new citizenships in 2012 were granted by the United Kingdom (193 900 or 24 %), Germany (114 600 or 14 %), France (96 100 or 12 %), Spain (94 100 or 12 %) and Italy (65 400 or 8.0 %).
Of those acquiring citizenship of an EU-28 Member State, 87 % had previously been citizens of non-EU countries. Of these, citizens of Morocco and Turkey made up the highest numbers, followed by citizens of India, Ecuador and Iraq.



European Commission


Data from July 2014. Most recent data: Further Eurostat information, Main tables and Database.
Migrants play an important role in the labour markets and economies of the countries they settle in. This article presents European Union statistics on the social inclusion of migrants as part of monitoring their integration and assessing their situation in the labour market. This in turn makes it easier to evaluate the outcomes of integration policies.
The indicators presented in this article are based on the Council conclusions on integration of 2010, the subsequent study ‘Indicators of immigrant integration — a pilot study’ (2011) and the report ‘Using EU indicators of immigrant integration’ (2013).
The present article elaborates on the existing Zaragoza indicators [1] on social inclusion together with some proposed additional ones. The indicators presented here cover the following social inclusion areas:
§  people at risk of poverty and social exclusion;
§  income distribution and monetary poverty;
§  living conditions;
In this article, data which are presented in the tables but are affected by low reliability due to small sample size or high non-response rates, are not used in the analysis.
For the purpose of this article the following terms are being used to describe various migrants groups.
For the population by country of birth:
§  Native-born – means population born in the reporting country
§  Foreign-born – means population born outside the reporting country
§  EU-born – means population born in the EU, except the reporting country
§  Non-EU-born – means population born outside the EU
For the population by citizenship:
§  Nationals – means citizens of the reporting country
§  Foreign citizens – means non-citizens of the reporting country
§  EU citizens – means citizens of the EU countries, except the reporting country
§  Non-EU citizens – means citizens of non-EU countries



European  Commission


Data from September 2014. Most recent data: Further Eurostat information, Main tables and Database.
This article presents the European Union (EU) indicators on the enforcement of immigration legislation (EIL). It provides statistics on non-EU citizens refused entry at external borders,[1] apprehended as being illegally present or subject to an obligation to leave the territory of an EU Member State. The indicators in this article can be regarded as an official record of persons subject to enforcement of immigration legislation, providing a general overview of the outcomes of territorial surveillance and control procedures.
According to the available data, irregular migration to the EU decreased significantly between 2008 and 2011, then stabilised over the last three years. The situation for individual EU Member States however varies in trend and level due to specific national factors such as national wealth, history and culture, geographical position, type and length of borders, border infrastructure, border control, judicial procedures, national policy and the legal framework related to irregular migration.



International Labour Organization (ILO) & Migration Policy Institute (MPI)

[full-text, 39 pages]

Press Release 18 November 2014
Many immigrants in Europe struggling to move out of low-skilled jobs; European governments have opportunities to prioritize policies to secure upward mobility

WASHINGTON and GENEVA — Against a backdrop of aging populations and persistently low economic growth, few European governments are doing enough to help recent immigrants move from low-skilled precarious jobs and into decent work, says a new report by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) and International Labour Organization (ILO).

The report, Aiming Higher: Policies to Get Immigrants into Middle-Skilled Work in Europe, shows that while some countries have made sizeable investments in labour market integration policies over the past decade, they have focused primarily on getting immigrants into work. As a result, these policies have struggled to facilitate career progression over time.



Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)

[read online, 430 pages]

This flagship publication on migration analyses recent developments in migration movements and policies in OECD countries and selected non-OECD countries. This edition also contains two special chapters on "The labour market integration of immigrants and their children: developing, activating and using skills" and "Managing labour migration: Smart policies to support economic growth". It also includes Country notes and a Statistical Annex. This special edition is launched at the occasion of the High-level Policy Forum on Migration (Paris, 1-2 December 2014).

Editorial: Migration policy in a time of uncertainty            
Executive summary       
Recent developments in international migration trends
Labour market integration of immigrants and their children: Developing, activating and using skills           
Managing labour migration: Smart policies to support economic growth
Statistical annex              
List of OECD Secretariat members involved in the preparation of this publication



Urban Institute (UI)

by Julia Gelatt, Heather Koball
[full-text, 31 pages]

The Immigrant Access to Health and Human Services project describes the legal and policy contexts that affect immigrant access to health and human services. The study aims to identify and describe federal, state, and local program eligibility provisions related to immigrants, major barriers to immigrants’ access to health and human services for which they are legally eligible, and innovative or promising practices that can help states manage their programs. This final report summarizes findings from the seven research briefs and one report that constitute this project.



World Bank
Policy Research Working Paper 6863

by Erhan Artuç, Frédéric Docquier, Çağlar Özden, Christopher Parsons
[full-text, 63 pages]

Discussions of high-skilled mobility typically evoke migration patterns from poorer to wealthier countries, which ignore movements to and between developing countries. This paper presents, for the first time, a global overview of human capital mobility through bilateral migration stocks by gender and education in 1990 and 2000, and calculation of nuanced brain drain indicators.

Building on newly collated data, the paper uses a novel estimation procedure based on a pseudo-gravity model, then identifies key determinants of international migration, and subsequently uses estimated parameters to impute missing data. Non-OECD destinations account for one-third of skilled-migration, while OECD destinations are declining in relative importance.


Bodies at the border: 'Many Mexicans have no option. This flow will not cease'

Bodies at the border: 'Many Mexicans have no option. This flow will not cease'
In Arizona, on the front line of the US's border with Mexico, we hear from the families split up


Tuesday, December 16, 2014

U.S. Family-Based Immigration Policy

Congressional Research Service (CRS)

U.S. Family-Based Immigration Policy
William A. Kandel,  Analyst in Immigration Policy
November 19, 2014
[full-text, 41 pages]

Family reunification is a key principle underlying U.S. immigration policy. It is embodied in the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which specifies numerical limits for five family-based
admission categories, as well as a per-country limit on total family-based admissions. The five
categories include immediate relatives of U.S. citizens and four other family-based categories that
vary according to individual characteristics such as the legal status of the petitioning U.S.-based
relative, and the age, family relationship, and marital status of the prospective immigrant.

Of the 990,553 foreign nationals admitted to the United States in FY2013 as lawful permanent
residents (LPRs), 649,763, or 66%, were admitted on the basis of family ties. Of these familybased
immigrants admitted in FY2013, 68% were admitted as immediate relatives of U.S.
citizens. Many of the 990,553 immigrants were initially admitted on a temporary basis and
became immigrants by converting or “adjusting” their status to a lawful permanent resident. The
proportion of family-based immigrants who adjusted their immigration status while residing in
the United States (54%) exceeded that of family-based immigrants who had their immigration
petitions processed while living abroad (46%), although such percentages varied considerably
among the five family-based admission categories.

Since FY2000, increasing numbers of immediate relatives of U.S. citizens have accounted for all
of the growth in family-based admissions. Between FY2000 and FY2009, immigrants who
accompanied or later followed principal (qualifying) immigrants averaged 12% of all familybased
admissions annually. During that period, Mexico, the Philippines, China, India, and the
Dominican Republic sent the most family-based immigrants to the United States.

Each year, the number of foreign nationals petitioning for LPR status through family-sponsored
preferences exceeds the supply of legal immigrant slots. As a result, a visa queue has accumulated
of foreign nationals who qualify as immigrants under the INA but who must wait for a visa to
immigrate to the United States. As such, the visa queue constitutes not a backlog of petitions to be
processed but, rather, the number of persons approved for visas not yet available due to INAspecified
numerical limits. As of November 1, 2013, the visa queue included 4.2 million persons.

Every month, the Department of State (DOS) produces its Visa Bulletin, which lists “cut-off
dates” for each of the four numerically limited family-based admissions categories. Cut-off dates
indicate when petitions that are currently being processed for a numerically limited visa were
initially approved. For most countries, cut-off dates range between 1.5 years and 12.5 years ago.
For countries that send the most immigrants, the range expands to between 2 and 23 years ago.
Interest in immigration reform has increased scrutiny of family-based immigration and revived
debate over its proportion of total lawful permanent admissions. Past or current proposals for
overhauling family-based admissions have been made by numerous observers, including two
congressionally mandated commissions.

Those who favor expanding the number of family-based admissions point to this sizable queue of
prospective immigrants who have been approved for lawful permanent residence but must wait
years separated from their U.S.-based family members until receiving a numerically limited
immigrant visa. Their proposals generally emphasize expanding the numerical limits of familybased
categories. Others question whether the United States has an obligation to reconstitute
families of immigrants beyond their nuclear families. Corresponding proposals would eliminate
several family-based preference categories, favoring only those for the immediate relatives of
U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. Such proposals reiterate recommendations made by
earlier congressionally mandated commissions on immigration reform.


Permanent Legal Immigration to the United States: Policy Overview

 Congressional Research Service (CRS)

Permanent Legal Immigration to the United States: Policy Overview
William A. Kandel, Analyst in Immigration Policy
October 29, 2014
[full-text, 16 pages]


The Obama Administration’s Announced, Immigration Initiative: A Primer

Congressional Research Service (CRS)

Legal Sidebar
The Obama Administration’s Announced, Immigration Initiative: A Primer
[full-text, 3 pages--with extensive links]

On November 20, President Obama announced the commencement of a multi-pronged immigration
initiative that could, among other things, enable a substantial portion of the unlawfully present alien
population to obtain temporary relief from removal and work authorization. The new initiative also involves
other actions, including narrowing the scope of aliens prioritized by federal immigration authorities for
removal; using “parole” authority to allow certain aliens to enter or remain in the United States; and
modifying rules relating to visa eligibility (or processing). This Sidebar provides a brief overview of the
major components of the announced initiative. A CRS Report providing more extensive analysis is in


Thursday, December 04, 2014

Congressional Research Service (CRS) Executive Discretion as to Immigration: Legal Overview

Congressional Research Service (CRS)

Executive Discretion as to Immigration: Legal Overview
Kate M. Manuel,  Legislative Attorney
Michael John Garcia,  Legislative Attorney
November 10, 2014
[full-text, 27 pages]

President Obama announced in June 2014 that he would seek “to fix as much of our immigration
system as I can on my own” through administrative action. Although the Obama Administration
has not yet announced the specific immigration actions it intends to take, the President has stated
that they will occur before the end of the year. It seems likely that such actions will prompt heated
legal debate concerning the scope of the Executive’s discretionary authority over immigration
matters, including with respect to the enforcement of immigration-related sanctions and the
granting of immigration benefits or privileges. Such debate may be similar to that which followed
the 2012 launch of the executive initiative commonly known as Deferred Action for Childhood
Arrivals (DACA), under which certain unlawfully present aliens who were brought to the United
States as children may be granted “deferred action” (a type of relief from removal) and work
authorization. While some have argued that DACA constitutes an abdication of the Executive’s
duty to enforce the laws and runs afoul of specific requirements found in the Immigration and
Nationality Act (INA), others have argued that the initiative is a lawful exercise of the
discretionary authority conferred on the Executive by the Constitution and federal statute.

Executive discretion over immigration matters is informed (and, in some instances,
circumscribed) by statutory delegations of authority and constitutional considerations. In some
cases, a particular immigration policy or initiative might be premised on multiple sources of
discretionary authority. These sources include the following:

Express delegations of discretionary authority by statute. In some instances, the
INA grants the Executive broad discretion to provide certain forms of relief or
benefits (e.g., work authorization or temporary protected status) to foreign
nationals. In other instances, the INA permits immigration authorities to waive the
application of requirements which would otherwise render an alien ineligible for
particular immigration benefits. The INA also gives the Executive broad “parole”
authority, under which immigration officials may sometimes permit aliens to
physically enter or remain in the country without such entry or presence
constituting “admission” for immigration purposes. Any exercises of such
statutory authority must be consistent with the terms of the delegation (although
the executive branch might have some discretion in interpreting the statute, as
discussed below).

Prosecutorial or enforcement discretion deriving from the Executive’s
independent constitutional authority. The Executive is generally recognized as
possessing some degree of independent authority in assessing whether to
prosecute apparent violations of federal law. However, specific statutory mandates
could be seen as limiting the Executive’s discretion to take particular actions (e.g.,
by requiring that certain aliens be detained pending removal proceedings). The
express adoption of a policy that constitutes an abdication of a statutory duty
could also be found to be impermissible, but it might be difficult for a court to
assess the degree of nonenforcement that would entail an “abdication.”

Discretion in interpreting and applying immigration law. The Supreme Court
has found that some deference may be owed to agency regulations (or
adjudications) which construe statutes that are “silent or ambiguous” as to specific
issues. The executive branch may also be afforded deference in less formal
interpretations of statutes and in interpreting its own regulations. However,
agency interpretations must conform to the “unambiguously expressed intent of


Thursday, September 04, 2014

Immigrants illegally in California comprise nearly 10% of workforce

Immigrants illegally in California comprise nearly 10% of workforce
A USC study looks at ways the estimated 2.6-million immigrants living in California without permission participate in state life.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?