Search

This paper develops and tests a simple general equilibrium model to explore the common allegation that illegal immigrants take jobs away from native-born workers. A simulation of the effect of an increase in illegal immigration shows that the distribution of the immigrants among industries is critical in determining their effect on employment. If two-thirds of the illegal immigrants are employed in the agricultural service sector, for example, an increase in illegal immigration would increase domestic unskilled employment, but if only half are employed in that sector, an increase would lead to a decline in domestic unskilled unemployment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wars, conflict, and persecution have forced more people to fee their homes and seek refuge and safety elsewhere than at any time since the end of World War II. As displaced people and other migrants increasingly move out of the conflict-ridden and less developed regions of their displacement and into relatively rich and stable regions of the world, the countries of destination are increasingly working to contain and even stem the migration flow before it reaches their shores. Perversely, countries that have developed generally rights-sensitive standards and procedures for assessing protection claims of asylum seekers within their jurisdictions have simultaneously established barriers that prevent migrants, including asylum seekers, from setting foot on their territories or otherwise triggering protection obligations. Consequently, those who would otherwise have been able to avail themselves of asylum procedures, social support, and decent reception conditions are often relegated to countries of first arrival or transit that have comparatively less capacity to ensure protection of human rights in accordance with international standards. This paper seeks to develop a working definition of the externalization of migration controls and how such externalization of the border implicates the human rights of migrants, and asylum seekers in particular. Although the majority of those migrants seeking legal protections stay in countries neighboring their own, hundreds of thousands continue their journeys in search of protection and stability in more distant states, including in the European Union, the United States, and Australia. In response to the significant increase in asylum seekers arriving at their borders, all three entities have significantly increased deterrence measures with the hopes of keeping new arrivals from entering. This paper will thus highlight a number of the most troubling externalization strategies used by the European Union, the United States, and Australia. Finally, because rights-threatening externalization law, policies, and practices implicate the international legal responsibility of the destination states pursuing them, the paper will conclude by presenting recommendations that could strengthen protection of human rights in the context of state actions seeking to manage migration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on a proposal that aims to universalize transnational labor rights in the U.S. It states that the Transnational Labor Citizenship proposal which would connect migrants with the unions, advocates, and worker centers before they leave their home countries and tighten the right to work in the U.S. with a commitment to report violations of workplace standards. It also discusses other kinds of mobile labor citizenship rsing from union experiments worldwide.

While the United States welcomes foreign-born students and trainees and, less warmly, temporary workers such as H-1B visa holders, it places an array of requirements, obstacles, and delays upon persons who would like to make the U.S. their permanent home. The number of people in the queue for legal permanent residence (LPR) is, however, difficult to ascertain. This paper estimates the number of highly skilled foreign-born persons waiting for LPR via the three main employment-based categories, separately by whether they are living in the United States or abroad, as well as the number of family members. We find that as of the end of FY 2006 there were about half a million employment-based principals awaiting LPR in the United States, together with over half a million family members, plus over 125 thousand principals and family members waiting abroad. These numbers dwarf the visas available annually – 120,120 plus any not used in the family preferences – suggesting that the long delays in gaining legal permanent residence are a visa number problem, not an administrative processing problem, as many believe. The backlog thus cannot be eliminated without a large change in public policy. The delay in gaining legal permanent residence could contribute to the decision of many highly skilled foreign-born to leave the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The intersection of race and immigrant status forms a unique social space where minority group members and immigrants are afforded or denied the privileges that are routinely accorded to native-born, non-Hispanic whites. Yet recent research on the intersection of race and immigrant status is inconsistent in its findings, limited to a small number of racial groups, and does not account for the geographic distribution of racial/ethnic groups. In this paper, we shed light on the intersection of race and immigrant status by answering two questions: (1) Do racial disparities in socioeconomic outcomes vary by nativity? and (2) Do native-immigrant disparities in socioeconomic outcomes vary by race? Using 2000 Census data linked to metropolitan area and sending country data, we find that racial disparities are similar and significant among natives and immigrants (Question 1). Asians, blacks, and Latinos fare significantly worse than their white counterparts in both the native and immigrant populations. Furthermore, our analysis of native-immigrant wage disparities by race reveals that the immigrant experience is considerably worse for Asians, blacks, and Latinos (Question 2). These groups also receive fewer wage returns to years spent in the U.S. and their wage disparities are magnified by the percentage of immigrants in a metropolitan area – whereas all whites receive a wage premium when living in an area with a larger share of immigrants. The results suggest that race and immigrant status work in concert to uniquely influence the social experience of immigrant minorities in the U.S. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Members of Congress have introduced numerous pieces of legislation in recent years related to refugees, asylum seekers, and other populations of migrants seeking protection in the United States. These bills were drafted in reaction to dramatic events within the United States, at its borders, and around the world. For example, roughly 400,000 children traveling alone and mothers with children have arrived at the southern US border since 2013, many seeking protection from organized crime, gang violence, and threats of human trafficking. Similarly, more than a million refugees from the Middle East, North Africa, and Asia sought to reach safety on the European continent in 2015 alone. Terrorist attacks fueled attempts to curtail the US commitment to offer protection to those feeing persecution, even when those attacks had no connection to refugees or only tenuous links. And yet existing US law has been left virtually unchanged throughout this tumultuous period. This article describes the significant attempts to enact legislation related to refugees and international migrants since 2013 and examines the reasons why those attempts have not succeeded. It also describes American attitudes toward refugees and assesses whether those attitudes affected the fate of legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why are there so many unauthorized migrants in the United States? Using unique survey data collected in Mexico through the Mexican Migration Project, I develop and test a new decision-making model of unauthorized labor migration. The new model considers the economic motivations of prospective migrants, as well as their beliefs, attitudes, and social norms regarding U.S. immigration law and legal authorities. My findings show that perceptions of certainty of apprehension and severity of punishment are not significant determinants of the intent to migrate illegally; however, perceptions of availability of Mexican jobs and the dangers of border crossing are significant determinants of these intentions. In addition, individuals’ general legal attitudes, morality about violating U.S. immigration law, views about the legitimacy of U.S. authority, and norms about border crossing are significant determinants of the intent to migrate illegally. Perceptions of procedural justice are significantly related to beliefs in the legitimacy of U.S. authority, suggesting that, all else being equal, procedural fairness may produce greater deference to U.S. immigration law. Together, the results show that the decision to migrate illegally cannot be fully understood without considering an individual’s underlying values and norms. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article focuses on the effects of an ambivalent legal status on Salvadoran and Guatemalan immigrants' experiences with the U.S. educational system, focusing on how liminal legality shapes access to educational opportunities and immigrants' perceptions of these opportunities. Drawing on the segmented assimilation framework and on thirty-four in-depth interviews conducted with Guatemalan and Salvadoran immigrants in Phoenix, Arizona, the author argues that an ambiguous legal status molds views and perceptions of educational prospects and, as such, is central in determining immigrants' place in the educational system. While waiting for their statuses to become regular, they dream of higher education—dreams that are for the most part unattainable. Their legality, while not the only determining factor, does exacerbate and facilitate other conditioning circumstances, such as financial difficulties, family separations, and so on, that also impinge on their educational prospects. This case highlights the importance of immigration policies in shaping assimilation in critical ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]