Immigration Surveillance Policy Aff

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative
Summary............................................................................................................................3
Glossary................................................................................................ 4-5
1AC..................................................................................................... 6-15
Inherency
Answers To: Deportations Decreasing Now...................................................16-8
Economic Hardship Advantage
Answers To: Illegal Immigration Hurts the Economy.....................................19-21
Solvency
Answers To: ICE improving now.................................................................22-3
Answers To: State laws deter immigration...................................................24-6
Answers To: Ending surveillance causes am inefficient system.........................27-9
Answer To: Ending surveillance fuels the smuggling crisis..............................29-30
Human Rights Advantage
Human Rights Advantage ......................................................................31-37
Answers To: ICE reducing rights violations..................................................38-39
Answers To: States have a right to deport..................................................40-42
Answer To: Curtailing surveillance makes immigration courts worse................42-43
Answers to: Curtailing surveillance leads to violent militias............................44-45
Answers To: Security should be prioritized over human rights ........................46-47
Answers to Crime Disadvantage
Immigration enforcement increases crime.................................................48-50
Immigration Surveillance makes fighting crime harder...................................51-2
Data linking Immigration to Crime Misleading.................................................53
Answers to Terrorism Disadvantage
Immigration Enforcement does not prevent terrorism.......................................54
Immigration funding trades off with terrorism prevention..............................55-59
Answers to DREAM Act Counterplan

NAUDL 2015-16
DREAM Act does not solve immigration issues..............................................60-2
DREAM Act harms immigrants- Military Recruitment .....................................63-4
DREAM Act does not prevent deportation.......................................................65
DREAM Act does not prevent surveillance......................................................66

NAUDL 2015-16 DREAM Act Counterplan Answers
Summary
Introduction to the Immigration Surveillance Affirmative
The Immigration Surveillance Affirmative seeks the end the surveillance of millions of
undocumented immigrants in the United States. Currently, federal immigration officials
and local law enforcement agencies track down undocumented immigrants because they
have violated the law by staying in the country illegally. The issue is that many of these
undocumented immigrants have already lived in the country for a long period of time,
contribute to the economy through employment and paying taxes, and have children
who are citizens. Despite the benefit that immigration brings to the United States, the
Obama administration (following in the footsteps of the Bush administration) has
attempted to increase the number of undocumented individuals deported each year and
has done so using advanced surveillance techniques and tactics.
Thus, the affirmative tries to reverse this trend of deportation by ending the surveillance
programs that are used to track down undocumented immigrants. The two advantages
to the 1AC are (1) The U.S economy and (2) Human rights abuses.
The U.S Economy Advantage Summary

The U.S economy advantage argues that process of finding and deporting millions of
undocumented immigrants is bad for the U.S economy. The reason this is true is that
millions of dollars are spent every year deporting undocumented immigrants.
Furthermore, most of the people that we end up deporting are critical to their local
economies because they have a job, they pay taxes, and many start their own
businesses. Immigrants are the economic backbone of this country because they supply
the economy with workers and they contribute to the economy like other Americans by
buying houses, going to restaurants, and engaging in the every day economic activities
that keep the U.S economy afloat. By deporting immigrants we make communities
poorer and cause the economy to decline.
The affirmative is able to solve for this by ending the surveillance programs that are used
to find and deport undocumented immigrants. When we no longer waste money trying to
find undocumented immigrants we allow those individuals to contribute to our economy
and make the country stronger
The Human Rights Advantage Summary

The Human Rights advantage argues that the federal government is currently violating
the rights of people by using surveillance to track them down and deport them.
Individuals who are tracked down and deported often have little access to legal
resources and are treated in gross and unethical ways. Human rights activist have found
that some people have been detained and left in prisons with horrible conditions, others
have been deported even though they are actually citizens!

The affirmative is able to solve for this by ending the surveillance programs that lead to
the deportation of undocumented immigrants.

Glossary (1/2)
Department of Homeland Security (DHS): Is an agency of the United States federal
government that was formed in 2002 from the combination of 22 departments and
agencies. The agency is charge of various task related to making the United States
homeland safe including customs, border, and immigration enforcement; emergency
response to natural and manmade disasters; antiterrorism work; and cybersecurity.
U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE): is an agency within the
Department of Homeland security that enforces federal laws governing border control,
customs, trade and immigration to promote homeland security and public safety.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (U.S.C.I.S.): The U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services is responsible for processing immigration and naturalization
applications and establishing policies regarding immigration services.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (C.B.P.): Customs and Border Protection
prevents people from entering the country illegally, or bringing anything harmful or
illegal into the United States.
Secure Communities Program: is a program of the U.S Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) that uses information shared between the ICE, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), and local law enforcement agencies to find whether individuals who
have a criminal record have also violated immigration law by entering the United States
illegally.
Non-governmental organizations (NGO): an organization that is not a part of the
government. For example, Doctors Without Borders is an NGO.
Undocumented Immigrant: refers to a foreign nationals residing in the U.S. without
legal immigration status. It includes persons who entered the U.S. without inspection and
proper permission from the U.S. government, and those who entered with a legal visa
that is no longer valid. Undocumented immigrants are also known as unauthorized or
illegal immigrants.
Border Patrol: is the agency in charge of watching and monitoring the border in order
to prevent people from entering the United States illegally.
Immigrants Detention Center: is a facility used by the federal government to house
undocumented immigrants who have been detained and subject to deportation.
Consular Consolidated Database (CCD): is a database used by U.S consular officials
that records data from visa applications such as photographs and democratic information
of applicants.

Glossary (2/2)
Arizona v. United States: a legal case brought to the Supreme Court of the United
States that dealt with whether the State of Arizona could make its own immigration law
independent of the federal government. On a 5-3 decision the court found that Arizona
could not make it a crime to be in Arizona without legal papers, making it a crime to
apply for or get a job in the state, or allowing police to arrest individuals who had
committed crimes that could lead to their deportation because those laws infringed upon
the federal governments authority in immigration law.
Federal expenditures: spending by the federal government.

Attendant: occurring with or as a result of; accompanying.
Dataveillance: Surveillance of someones personal data.
Duress: describes a range of symptoms and experiences of a person's internal life that
are commonly held to be troubling, confusing or out of the ordinary.
Alterity: the state of being other or different; otherness.

Yielded: produce or provide.
Human Rights: a right that is believed to belong justifiably to every person.
Civil Rights: the rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality.
Nonjusticiable: If a case is "nonjusticiable." a federal court cannot hear it.

1AC

Contention One: Inherency

The current state of immigration policy in the United

States is characterized by a reliance on surveillance
technologies to track and deport undocumented
immigrants.
The federal government has been spending vast amounts of money on
surveillance programs that lack any oversight or accountability.
Kalhan, Associate Professor of Law, Drexel University, 2014 [Immigration
Surveillance, 74 Md. L. Rev. 1 www.digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mlr/vol74/iss1/2]
Federal expenditures on
border and immigration control have grown
fifteen-fold
since 1986
and now substantially exceed expenditures
on all other federal law enforcement programs combined.5 These activities have been supplemented by a dizzying array of initiatives, often administered by state, local, and private actors, that indirectly enforce immigration law by regulating access to rights, benefits,
These
yield a
increase in the number of noncitizens
removed from the
U S
change in
immigration regulation
hastened by
new surveillance and data-veillance technologies.
has
become information-centered and technology-driven
citizens are subject to collection and
analysis
This
is
stored by government
agencies
with little
transparency, oversight, or accountability
and servicesincluding employment, social services, drivers licenses, transportation services, and educationbased on citizenship or immigration status.6 Increasingly, immigration control objectives also are pursued using criminal prosecutions.7
initiatives have
nited
ed
staggering, widely noted
formally
tates.8 Much less widely noted, however, has been the full significance of that growthincluding an attendant sea
itself,
the underlying nature of
the implementation of transformative
other areas of contemporary governance, immigration control
rapidly
Like many
an
enterprise. At virtually every stage of the process of migrating or traveling to, from, and within the United States, both noncitizens and U.S.
of extensive quantities of personal information for immigration control and other purposes.
now
information
aggregated and
for long retention periods in networks of interoperable databases and shared among a variety of public and private actors, both inside and outside the United States,
Deportation of people without a criminal record is still increasing despite

improvements in the deportation selection process.
Barrera and Krogstad, researchers at the Pew Research Center, 2014 [ANA
GONZALEZ-BARRERA AND JENS MANUEL KROGSTAD, U.S. deportations of immigrants
reach record high in 2013, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-sdeportations-of-immigrants-reach-record-high-in-2013/]
The
Obama
administration
deported
a record
438,421 unauthorized immigrants in
fiscal year
2013
, continuing a streak of stepped
up enforcement that has resulted in more than 2 million deportations since Obama took office, newly released Department of Homeland Security data show. President Obama today is scheduled to address members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, a group that
has recently criticized the president on immigration. Last month, the caucus urged the president to take executive action on immigration by extending deportation relief to certain groups of unauthorized immigrants, such as parents of U.S.-born children. Some
immigrant advocates have dubbed
years as
Obama
Bush
the George W.
has deported
deported in eight years.
the deporter in chief over the fact that his administration
administration
about
as many immigrants in five
During his speech, Obama is expected to reiterate his pledge to make changes to immigration policy on his
own, something he said he will do after the November midterm elections.

Contention Two: Economy
10

If the federal government continues deporting people the

U.S economy will face a decline in growth and high
unemployment.
A. Undocumented immigrants and their families hold trillions of
dollars of purchasing power that drive economic growth.
Nowrasteh, the immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institutes Center for
Global Liberty and Prosperity, 2013 [Alex, CATO Institute, Deporting Customers
Hurts the Economy, http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/deporting-customershurts-economy]
Hispanic and Asian Americans have
$1.9 trillion in annual purchasing power
16 percent of total purchasing
power
Without that $1.9 trillion
Americans will have lower
wages and fewer employment opportunities. Immigrants
did not take
that
from Americans they made it by working, creating businesses,
and making goods and services
Those critics of immigration forget that immigrants arent just workers, they are also consumers of products made by Americans.
around
about
, according to a recent report from the Selig Center of Economic Growth from the University of Georgia. Hispanic and Asian immigrants have dominated both lawful and unlawful immigration in recent decades, while their Americanized descendants
are responsible for much of American population growth.
in purchasing power,
and their descendants
$1.9 trillion in wealth
the
that people want to buy. In turn, they spend much of it here.
B. Deportation is expensive and cost billions of dollars over time.

Uwimana, an editor and senior researcher at Media Matters, 2014 [Solange,
Media Matters, Deporting Longstanding Undocumented Immigrants Would Cost U.S.
Billions, http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/04/10/deporting-longstandingundocumented-immigrants/198845]
the U S would need to spend at least $285 billion
deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants
A 2010 study by the Center for American Progress (CAP) estimated that
nited
tates
over five years
to
currently in the country. That figure includes the cost of apprehending immigrants, detaining them for an
average of 30 days, legally processing them, and transporting them back to their birth countries. CAP explained: In these challenging economic times, spending a king's ransom to tackle a symptom of our immigration crisis without addressing g root causes would be a
. Spending
would require $922 in new taxes
this
kind of money
could provide every
student
an extra
$5,100
.
$285 billion is more
than
Medicaid
deportation
would reduce
economic output by 1.46 percent per year.
$2.6 trillion in lost GDP
over 10 years.
massive waste of taxpayer dollars
$285 billion
were raised, it
for every man, woman, and child in this country. If
public and private school
for their education. Or more frivolously, that $285 billion would pay for about 26,146 trips in the private space travel rocket, Falcon 1e
what the federal government spent to maintain the
In a 2010 CAP study, UCLA political scientist Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda found that enacting a mass
from prekindergarten to the 12th grade
Put another way,
a little
health program in 2013. However, that cost to the federal government would be compounded by the loss of economic activity generated by undocumented immigrants.
policy -- which he described as "not a realistic policy option" --
He added: "This amounts to a cumulative
"
C. Undocumented immigrants help the economy grow by purchasing

houses and renting apartments
Nowrasteh, the immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institutes Center for
Global Liberty and Prosperity, 2013 [Alex Nowrasteh, received his Bachelor of Arts in
economics from George Mason University and Master of Science in economic history
from the London School of Economics, CATO Institute, Deporting Customers Hurts the
Economy, http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/deporting-customers-hurtseconomy]
11

immigrants pay
landowners
Those
landlords and homeowners then see the value of their property
increase. Removing immigrants therefore lower
real estate
the
biggest driver of long-term wealth
During the housing bust, Arizona passed
two laws
to target unlawful immigrants
around 200,000 of them
left the state,
The jobs they left behind
remained unfilled along with vacated apartments and houses
the
home price index
declined by 32.9 percent. Phoenix
declined by a whopping 51.29 percent.
Albuquerque and Los
Angeles recorded vacancy rates
50 to 75 percent lower than those
in
Phoenix
Immigrants, for example, demand an enormous amount of real estate. Whether through renting apartments or buying houses,
citizens.
a lot to
, who are overwhelmingly American
American
would
the value of
understood to be one of
of any sector.
that forced businesses and the police
. As a result,
mainly from the Phoenix area, and took their purchasing power with them.
in construction and agriculture
their
. In the six years after April 2006,
for the 20 largest metropolitan areas in the nation
In the
area, the price index
The housing bust, caused by myriad other factors, was exacerbated in Phoenix by forcing 200,000 consumers of real estate out of the
region. After those laws were passed, home and rental vacancy rates in Arizona were consistently above those in California and New Mexico. Years after the Arizona laws were passed,
that were
prevailing
. For our service economy, where the most valuable asset many Americans own is their home, importing more consumers will be a blessing while removing the ones here will be a curse.
D. Times of high unemployment and slow growth hurt families and

society
Baker and Hasset 12 [Dean Baker is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Kevin Hassett is
director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. The Human Disaster of
Unemployment,.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/opinion/sunday/the-human-disaster-of-unemployment.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0]
Unemployment is
traumatic
economists
estimates a 50 to 100 percent increase in death rates
following a job loss,
There are various reasons
almost always a
event, especially for older workers. A paper by the
Daniel Sullivan and Till von Wachter
for older male workers
in the years
immediately
if they previously had been consistently employed. This higher mortality rate implies that a male worker displaced in midcareer can expect to live about one and a half years less than a worker who
keeps his job.
for this rise in mortality. One is suicide. A recent study found that a 10 percent increase in the unemployment rate (say from 8 to 8.8 percent) would increase the
suicide rate for males by 1.47 percent. This is not a small effect. Assuming a link of that scale, the increase in unemployment would lead to an additional 128 suicides per month in the United States. The picture for the long-term unemployed is especially disturbing.
The duration of unemployment is

in the relationship between joblessness
and
suicide. Joblessness is also associated with serious illnesses
The
physical and psychological consequences of unemployment
affect
family members. economists
found an 18 percent increase in the
probability of divorce
the dominant force
the risk of
some
, although the causal links are
poorly understood. Studies have found strong links between unemployment and cancer, with unemployed men facing a 25 percent higher risk of dying of the disease. Similarly higher risks have been found for heart disease and psychiatric problems.
are significant enough to
The
Kerwin Charles and Melvin Stephens recently
following a husbands job loss and 13 percent after a wifes. Unemployment of parents also has a negative impact on achievement of their children. In the long run, children whose fathers lose a
job when they are kids have reduced earnings as adults about 9 percent lower annually than children whose fathers do not experience unemployment. We all understand how the human costs can be so high. For many people, their very identity is their occupation.
Few events rival the emotional strain of job loss.
12

Scenario 1 Economic Collapse

E. Econ Collapse is the most likely scenario for external conflict
outweighs all other impacts.
Royal 10 (Jedidiah, Director of Cooperative Threat Reduction at the U.S. Department of Defense, Integration, Vulnerability and Risk: A New
Framework for Understanding the Economic-Security Nexus, From Chapter 3, Idiosyncratic Risk and Mitigation, p. 53-54, Masters Thesis in
Philosophy, University of New South Wales, Australian Defence Force Academy, School of Humanities and Social Sciences,
2011, http://unsworks.unsw:10112/SOURCE01)
Less intuitive is how periods of
economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict
. Political science
literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the impact of economic decline and the security and defence behaviour of interdependent stales. Research in this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels. Several notable
rhythms in the global economy

are associated with the rise and fall of a pre-eminent power and the often
bloody transition
economic crises could usher in a
redistribution of relative power
that leads to uncertainty about power
balances, increasing the risk of miscalculation
permissive environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a
declining power
contributions follow. First, on the systemic level. Pollins (20081 advances Modclski and Thompson's (1996) work on leadership cycle theory, finding that
from one pre-eminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as
(see also Gilpin. 19SJ)
(Fcaron. 1995). Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power could lead to a
(Werner. 1999). Separately. Pollins (1996) also shows that global economic cycles combined with parallel leadership cycles impact the likelihood of conflict among major, medium and small powers, although he
suggests that the causes and connections between global economic conditions and security conditions remain unknown. Second, on a dyadic level. Copeland's (1996. 2000) theory of trade expectations suggests that 'future expectation of trade' is a significant variable
interdependent states are likely to gain pacific

benefits from trade so long as they have an optimistic view of future trade
relations. However, if the expectations of future trade decline, particularly for
difficult to replace items such as energy resources, the likelihood for conflict
increases
in understanding economic conditions and security behaviour of states. He argues that
, as states will be inclined to use force to gain access to those resources. Crises could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade expectations either on its own or because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent states.4
Third, others have considered the link between economic decline and external armed conflict at a national level. Momberg and Hess (2002) find a strong correlation between internal conflict and external conflict, particularly during periods of economic downturn. They
Economic conflict tends to spawn internal

conflict, which in turn returns the favor. Moreover, the presence of a recession
tends to amplify the extent to which international and external conflicts selfreinforce each other.
write. The linkage, between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually reinforcing.
However, the ability of government organizations to stop the spread of internal conflict to external conflict and vice versa by helping to reduce the incidence of recessions may be quite
limited. Economic aid that is to improve a nations productive capacity is likely to be difficult to identify and implement in just such circumstances. (Blomberg and Hess 2002, 89) Further, crises often reduce the popularity of a sitting government.
Diversionary theory suggests that, when facing unpopularity rising from

economic decline, sitting governments, particularly in democracies, have
increased incentives to fabricate external military conflicts in order to create a
rally around the flag effect.
Miller (1999) suggests that the tendency towards diversionary tactics are greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders
are generally more susceptible to being removed from office due to lack of domestic support. Wang (1996), DcRoucn (1995), and Blombcrg. Hess, and Thacker (2006) find supporting evidence showing that economic decline and use of force arc at least indirecti)
correlated. Gelpi (1997). Miller (1999). and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that Ihe tendency towards diversionary tactics arc greater for democratic states than autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are generally more susceptible to being
removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has provided evidence showing that periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak Presidential popularity, are statistically linked lo an increase in the use of force. In
summary, rcccni economic scholarship positively correlates economic integration with an increase in the frequency of economic crises, whereas political science scholarship links economic decline with external conflict al systemic, dyadic and national levels.' This
implied connection between integration, crises and armed conflict has not featured prominently in the economic-security debate and deserves more attention.
13

Scenario 2 Economic Growth

F. Growth increases life expectancy, education and quality of life while
allowing the government to fund programs for the public good
Furchtgott-Roth senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, 2013 (Diana,
former chief economist of the U.S. Department of Labor, Only Growth Can Sustain Us
New York Times nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/01/16/when-growth-is-not-a-goodgoal/only-growth-can-sustain-us)
Economic growth raises standards of living
In developing
countries
. growth results in lower infant mortality, running water, sewer
systems, electricity, better schools and education
In developed countries,
economic growth gives tax revenue for cleaner air and water, for missile
defense, for health and education programs
and the only way to pay for these is the tax revenue from
economic growth.
for rich and poor countries alike. The more growth, the better.
, higher G.D.P
for children, as can be seen from comparative World Bank data. As electric power plants replace
wood stoves, the air is cleared of smog. As girls receive more education, birth rates naturally decline as women choose to make use of their human capital by entering the labor force.
us the
. Stringent Environmental Protection Agency regulations do not come cheap. Republicans and Democrats both have
extensive wish lists for favorite government programs,
from
Here in America, we have all the food we can eat, and more clothes than we can fit in our closets. At the same time, were seeing deteriorating family structures that reduce educational performance. About
three-quarters of poor families with children are headed by a single parent. Poor children may have cellphones, but they need competitive schools (like KIPP) to make sure they do not fall behind. Our parents and grandparents are requiring more support as their life
expectancies increase.
14

Contention Three: Human Rights
15

Surveillance and deportation of undocumented immigrants

infringes on basic human rights
A. Our deportation programs are ineffective because the primary
targets of deportation are innocent individuals, with no criminal
record, who have already lived in the U.S for years
Ewing, Senior Researcher at the American Immigration Council, 2014
[Walter Ewing, Ph.D., is Senior Researcher at the American Immigration Council, The
Growth of the U.S Deportation Machine, http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/justfacts/growth-us-deportation-machine]
the immigrants
deported
have strong ties to the U S such as
homes
disproportionately by children
Many of
now being
are long-term legal permanent residents of the United States who have run afoul of the 1996 laws. Yet even many of the unauthorized immigrants being deported
nited
tates,
U.S.-citizen
family
the burden
jobs and
is shouldered
members (especially U.S.-born children), not to mention
in the United States. Families containing a member who is an unauthorized immigrant live in constant fear of separation. And
of deportation
. According to estimates from the Pew Hispanic Center, there are 4 million U.S.-born children in the United States with at least one parent who is an unauthorized
DHS estimates that

three-fifths of
unauthorized immigrants have lived in the U S for more than a decade
immigrant, plus 1.1 million children who are themselves unauthorized immigrants and have unauthorized-immigrant parents. Moreover,
nearly
nited
tates
. In other words, most
of these people are not single young men, recently arrived, who have no connection to U.S. society. These are men, women, and children who are already part of U.S. society.
B. Moreover, the federal governments policy of mass deportation

overburdens our immigration courts as thousands attempt to get in
the United States each year.
Costa, EPI Director of Immigration Law and Policy Research, 2014 [Overloaded
Immigration Courts, Economic Policy Institute,
http://www.epi.org/publication/immigration-court-caseload-skyrocketing/]
The immigration court is severely underfunded there are too few judges
Tens of thousands of
children
will be
waiting for years while cases are adjudicated
system
and
since caseloads began skyrocketing in 2009.
unaccompanied migrant
their
, especially
fleeing from Central America and arriving at the Southwest border
being
. Rather than providing sufficient funding for new immigration judges, multiple proposals in Congress
would amend current law to eliminate the right these vulnerable children have to a full hearing in court. The figure shows that in 1998, the immigration court system had 202 judges who were responsible for 129,500 cases. The caseload has increased dramatically
courts have a backlog of 375,500 cases and 243

judges
thousands of immigrants
wait
for a hearing it can
take three to five years for their cases to be resolved
since then but the number of judges has not kept pace: The immigration
to adjudicate them. Hundreds of
now
only
, including children,
an average of 587 days
immigration
, and
. Each immigration judge is responsible for an average of 1,500 cases, approximately
three times more than the average caseload for federal court judges. In busier courts immigration judges may be responsible for 2,500 to 6,000 cases, and some have only seven minutes to hear each.
C. Surveillance causes over 11 million people to live in constant fear of

deportation - destroys social cohesion, throws children into poverty,
and causes psychological trauma.
Immigration Policy Center, 2008 [Immigration Enforcement and Its Unintended
Consequences, Mon, Mar 31, 2008, http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/justfacts/immigration-enforcement-and-its-unintended-consequences]
The number of very young children affected by worksite raids is alarmingly high. On average, the number of children affected by worksite
raids is about half the number of adults arrested . Over 900 adults were arrested in the three study sites, and the parents among
them collectively had just over 500 children. A large majority of the children affected are U.S. citizens. Nationwide, there are approximately five million U.S.-citizen children with at least one undocumented parent,
approximately 80
percent were ages ten and younger. In one site, more than half were ages five and younger. The raids resulted in
immediate needs for childcare and basic services. Many arrested parents were unable
and policies that target their parents have grave effects on the children. The children included in the report were very young. In two of the sites,
16

to arrange for alternative childcare because they had limited ability to communicate with family members. Some were not able to make phone calls,
some were held in detention centers far from their homes , and others signed voluntary
departure papers and left the country before they could contact lawyers or caregivers. Informal
family and community networks took on significant caregiving responsibilities and economic support of children. Many families faced severe economic
instability as their incomes plunged following the arrest of working adults. In all three sites, school districts played an important role in ensuring that children were not dropped off to empty homes
or left at school overnight. However, some children were left without adult supervision, and others were taken into foster care. The raids had a long-term economic and psychological impact on families. Many
families continued to experience significant economic hardship and

psychological stress because of the arrests and separations, as well as from the uncertainty of knowing if or when an arrested parent would be released Following the arrest of a
parent, children often experience feelings of abandonment and show symptoms of emotional trauma, psychological duress,
and mental health problems. However , due to cultural reasons and fear of the negative consequences of asking for assistance, very few
affected families seek mental health care.
D. Harsh deportation practices have been reported to cause thousands

of human rights abuses every year.
Amuedo-Dorantes & Pozo, The Institute for the Study of Labor, 2014 [Catalina
Amuedo-Dorantes San Diego State University and IZA Susan Pozo Western Michigan
University and IZA, On the Intended and Unintended Consequences of Enhanced Border
and Interior Immigration Enforcement: Evidence from Deportees,
http://ftp.iza.org/dp8458.pdf]
While state-level omnibus immigration laws reduce the proportion of deportees intending to attempt a new crossing, increased border enforcement has proven to be far less effective. In addition, we ascertain human costs associated with these policies. Our findings
are mixed in this regard. Noteworthy is how
ganging-up
likely to
the adoption of
result in herding or
deportees are more
risk their lives to cross into the United States
more stringent
interior enforcement
seems to
effect whereby the incidence of verbal and physical abuse rises with the number of states enacting such measures. Additionally, our estimates suggest that
respond that they have
ed
as a result of enhanced border enforcement. I. Motivation,
Objectives and Contributions With the onset of the past recession, we observed a heighted sense of animosity toward undocumented immigrants. The charged climate was due, perhaps, to the belief that undocumented immigration was out of control, adding to the
rising competition for scarce jobs. Fiscal and job market pressures led, in turn, to the adoption of various measures intended to reduce the presence of unauthorized immigrants. Broadly speaking, enforcement increased at both border and interior points by federal and
by state-level governments. For instance, at the federal level, programs like Operation Streamline (OS) significantly raised the penalties for being apprehended while crossing the border. Before the implementation of OS, it was typically the case that first time unlawful
border crossers with no criminal history were simply returned to Mexico. But OS changed that, making it mandatory that all unauthorized crossers be charged with a criminal act and imprisoned (Lydgate 2010). Simultaneously, state governments started to implement
policies that dealt with unauthorized migration. This began with the widespread adoption of employment verification (E-Verify) systems, a free web-based program that employers can use to verify that job applicants are eligible to work in the United States. E- Verify
was soon followed by the enactment of state-level omnibus immigration laws authorizing state and local police to check the immigration status of individuals they had probable cause to arrest.1 In some instances, these laws went even further, as in the case of
Alabama, where the law required that public school officials check the immigration status of students. At the same time,
on the rise
practices were documented and
reports of abuses against immigrants were

These
(Diaz and Kuhner 2007; Fernandez 2011). Migrant rights violations ranged from verbal and physical abuse to failure to return personal belongings or inform migrants of their rights.
denounced by the United Nations, the Organization of American States Special Rapporteurs, the Mexican Human Rights Commission, and numerous NGOs
more than
30,000 incidents of human rights abuses against undocumented immigrants
between fall 2008 and spring 2011
(Organization of American States 2003; United Nations 2002). For instance, the Arizona humanitarian aid organization No More Deaths issued two reports: Crossing the Line and A Culture of Cruelty, in which they document
in short-
term detention
Human rights are a moral obligation that outweighs all other concerns
Burggraeve, Emeritus Professor at KU Leuven, 2005 (Roger, 1/1/2005 The Good
and Its Shadow: The View of Levinas on Human Rights as the Surpassing of Political
Rationality, Human Rights Review Vol. 6, Issue 2, pp. 80-101)//EM
human rights
surpass
every
system.
The one who thinks and acts from the basis of human rights
does more
than what the
structures can achieve.
And
fulfill this defense in different ways, in the sense that they both
as well as correct and supplement
social, economic, juridical, and political
--e.g., standing up for and committing oneself to the fights of
certain minorities or forgotten people--then
in terms of humanization
sociopolitical
This is so because
these structures can never take to heart completely the singular realization of the rights of the unique other. In our ever more international and structurally constructed societal bonds, they precisely make it possible to orientate separately every responsible person
towards the necessary surplus of the good for each and every other. In one of his three articles, which Levinas dedicated entirely to human rights, 4 he ex- pressed the bond between the uniqueness of the other and human rights in a radical and challenging manner
Human rights,
irrevocable and inalienable
(HS 176-78).
which in no way whatsoever must be attributed from without because they
are
experienced as
a priori and therefore

every
as
, express the alterity or absoluteness of every human being (AT 151). Every reference is annulled by human rights since it is acknowledged that
17

individual
possesses those rights: they are inherent to their being

Thanks to the
belongingness of every person to
humanity--every person possesses an
incomparable alterity and uniqueness,
person
-human as persons. In this regard,
human rights wrench every human person away from the determining order of nature and the social body, to which everyone indeed obviously belongs. Herein lies, according to Levinas, a remarkable paradox.
the human kind --
whereby everyone likewise transcends the generalness of the human kind. The belongingness of every person to the human kind does
not mean a reduction to a neutral unity, but a presentation as a unique person, who by means of that fact itself actually destroys humanity as an abstract idea. Every person is unique in his or her genre. Every person is a person like every other person and yet utterly
unique and irreducible: a radi- cally separate other. Humanity exists only by grace of irreducible beings, who are for each other utterly unique and non-exchangeable others. Levinas also calls it the absolute identity of the person (HS 176). It is about a uniqueness that
surpasses every individuality of the many individuals in their kind. The uniqueness or dignity of every individual person does not depend on one or the other specific and distinctive difference. It is about an "unconditional" uniqueness, in the sense that the dignity of
the person--over every individual person--is not determined by their sex, color of skin, place of birth, moment of their existence, nor by the possession of certain qualities and capacities. Every person possesses dignity that is to be utterly respected, independent of
whichever property or characteristic. It is about a uniqueness that precedes every difference, namely understanding a radical alterity as an irreducible and Burggraeve 93 inalienable alterity, whereby a person can precisely say "I." This leads Levinas to state that
human rights reveal the uniqueness or the absoluteness of the human person, in spite of their belongingness to the human kind or rather thanks to this belongingness.
18

Scenario 1 Laundry List

E. Immigration surveillance causes a laundry list of impacts including
racial discrimination, the worsening of crime and public safety,
sexual assault, and thousands of deaths
The Human Rights Immigrant Community Action Network, An initiative of
the National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NIRR), 2010
[Injustice for All: The Rise of the U.S. Immigration Policing Regime, The National Network
for Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NNIRR) works to defend and expand the rights of all
immigrants and refugees, regardless of immigration status,
http://www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/nnir.pdf]
Residents will not report crimes and fires if they fear
detection and deportation Women are less likely to report domestic violence
Batterers
threaten their partners with
ICE to stop
them from reporting an abusive relationship.
ocal police departments
cut back other vital
community services,
Police cooperation
encourages racial profiling
resulting in civil rights violations
collaboration undermines the credibility of police departments
Police collusion with ICE undermines community safety.
their partners have immigration status.
if they or
are also more likely to
turning them over to
s Equally troubling, local law enforcement is not trained in immigration law and requires substantial amounts of
time and money to reach a satisfactory level of expertise. As a result, l
affecting community safety; and s
already illegal,
, already strapped on resources and manpower,
with ICE
and abuses against immigrant and refugee communities. Even where police departments have worked to end racial profiling, such
to effectively serve all communities. In some states and
localities, local police and sheriffs can ask individuals for proof of their immigration statusand turn them over to DHS officialssimply based on their perceived status as undocumented immigrants.xiii These practices have fueled racial profiling and other forms of
discrimination.xiv The Western North Carolina 100 Stories Project reports specific cases where local and county police deliberately used transit stops to arrest a Latino driver to turn over to ICE; see their report on page 16.
laws
and policing
have created an anti-immigrant atmosphere
Immigration
in which some county hospitals, schools, and other public agencies as well as private
citizens, including landlords, employers, and even border vigilantes, have been emboldened to take the law into their own handsattempting to detect, report, and even detain undocumented immigrants in their communities.
19

Scenario 2 Structural Violence

F. Prefer this impact structural violence is invisible and exponential
outweighs conventional forms of violence like warming or nuke war.
Nixon 11 (Rob, Richard Carson, Professor of English, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Slow Violence and Environmentalism of
the Poor, pgs 2-3, https://www4.uwm.edu/c21/pdfs/events/nixon_slowviolence_intro.pdf, accessed 7/30/15)
we urgently need to rethink - politically, imaginatively, and theoretically what I call

slow violence. By slow violence, I mean a violence that occurs gradually and out of sight, a violence of delayed destruction that is dispersed
across time and space, an attritional violence that is typically not viewed as violence at all. Violence is customarily conceived as
an event or action that is immediate in time, explosive and spectacular in space, and as erupting into instant sensational
visibility. We need, I believe, to engage a different kind of violence, a violence that is neither spectacular nor
instantaneous, but rather incremental and accretive, its calamitous repercussions playing out across a range of temporal scales. In so doing, we
also need to engage the representational, narrative, and strategic challenges posed by the relative invisibility of slow violence.
Climate change, the thawing cryosphere, toxic drift, biomagnification, deforestation, the radioactive aftermaths of wars, acidifying oceans, and a host of other slowly unfolding
Three primary concerns animate this book. Chief among them my conviction that
environmental catastrophes present formidable representational obstacles that can hinder our efforts to mobilize and act decisively. The long dyings - the staggered and staggeringly discounted casualties, both
human and ecological that result from war's toxic aftermaths or climate change-are underrepresented in strategic planning as well as in human memory. Had Summers advocated invading Africa with
weapons of mass destruction, his proposal would have fallen under conventional definitions of
violence and been perceived as a military or even an imperial invasion. Advocating invading countries with mass forms
of slow-motion toxicity, however, requires rethinking our accepted
assumptions of violence to include slow violence. Such a rethinking requires that
we complicate conventional assumptions about violence as a highly visible act
that is newsworthy because it is event focused, time bound, and body bound. We need to account for how the
temporal dispersion of slow violence affects the way we perceive and respond to a variety of
social afflictions-from domestic abuse to posttraumatic stress and, in particular, environmental calamities. A major challenge is representational: how to devise arresting stories, images,
and symbols adequate to the pervasive but elusive violence of delayed effects. Crucially, slow violence is often not just attritional but also exponential, operating as a
major threat multiplier; it can fuel long-term, proliferating conflicts in situations where the conditions for
sustaining life become increasingly but gradually degraded.
20

Plan-Text
Thus, the plan - The USFG should substantially curtail its domestic
surveillance by ending its surveillance of undocumented immigrants
intended for deportation.
21

Contention Four: Solvency

Suspending surveillance for deportation can immediately halt human
rights abuses and bring security to millions of immigrants.
The Human Rights Immigrant Community Action Network, 2010 [Injustice
for All: The Rise of the U.S. Immigration Policing Regime, The National Network for
Immigrant and Refugee Rights (NNIRR) works to defend and expand the rights of all
immigrants and refugees, regardless of immigration status,
http://www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/nnir.pdf]
RECOMMENDATIONS Injustice for All urges the U.S. government to undertake a major shift in immigration policies and address the patterns of human and civil rights violations.
The U.S. must provide
access to the adjustment of immigration status,

Without a shift, millions of men, women and children
in this country will
continue to face lives of fear, uncertainty and economic insecurity.
Obama
can authorize,
The suspension of
detentions and deportations
a process long held at bay by a lack of political will and action at the federal level.
such
residing
There are significant steps that the
Administration
including: The restoration of due process rights and other Constitutional protections, including access to the courts;
, other ICE enforcement operations and high profile raids; a high-level investigation and hearings with impacted communities; An end to the policy and practice of jailing
persons solely for immigration status offenses, except in cases where there is a high risk to public safety; The prohibition of ICE and local, county, state and federal law enforcement from using all forms of racial, ethnic/nationality and religious profiling; A thorough
investigation of complaints of abuses in public and private corporate immigrant detention centers and jails; a moratorium on the expansion of detention centers and privately run prisons; An end to all inter-agency and immigration-police collaboration programs;
Prohibition of local, county, and state governments from legislating immigration enforcement, such as Arizonas SB1070; The roll back and end to the militarization of immigration control and border communities; end Operation Stonegarden and Operation Streamline.
iv Finally, disturbed by the lack of congressional action to enact fair immigration policies, and on our elected officials in the House and Senate to: Hold field hearings with members of interior and border communities to document the impacts and abuses caused by U.S.
immigration policing and border security policies, measures and practices; Repeal employer sanctions and stop all E-Verify programs; protect and expand the labor rights of all workers, native and foreign-born; and increase Department of Labor inspectors; Repeal the
287(g) and Secure Communities initiatives; Provide and expand options to legal migration, including access to legal permanent residency and citizenship; Institute routine programs, including legalization, to adjust the immigration status and provide green cards to
immigrants, to ensure civil and labor rights, keep families together and reinforce healthy communities. we call upon the Administration and members of Congress: To address the root causes of displacement and involuntary migration, by
promoting and implementing fair trade and sustainable community

development policies
condemnation of racial intolerance and
xenophobia keeping with our countrys
commitment to equality for all
; To help lead a nationwide
in
legal and moral
. We further
urge the United States to respect and uphold international human and labor rights standards, including the ratification and implementation of the U.N. International Convention for the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families and
the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. .
Immigrants reduce unemployment by creating new jobs

Russel, reporter at the Washington Examiner, 2015 [Jason Russel, How immigrants
boost your local economy, http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/how-immigrants-boostyour-local-economy/article/2563678]
according to a
paper
by the National Bureau of
Economic Research.
every immigrant creates 1.2 local jobs
raises
wages
and attracts native-born workers from elsewhere
immigrants increases the
combined income of a local area, boosting demand
Immigrants create jobs for native-born American workers,
new working
published
The paper says
for local workers,
for native workers,
in the country. The paper was authored by Gihoon Hong,
with Indiana University South Bend, and John McLaren, with the University of Virginia. Hong and McLaren used Census data from 1980-2000 to reach their conclusions. The arrival of
for workers in local service jobs, part of the non-traded sector. Hong and McLaren found that
these types of local service jobs create more than four-fifths of total income, so immigration to a local area requires more service workers. "We find that new immigrants tend to raise local wages slightly even in terms of tradeables for jobs in the non-traded sector
while they push wages down slightly in the traded sector, and that new immigrants seem to attract native workers into the metropolitan area," Hong and McLaren wrote. "Overall, it appears that local workers benefit from the arrival of more immigrants. Immigration
opponents sometimes claim that immigrants crowd out native workers, who lose jobs and move away from immigrant-heavy areas. To the contrary, Hong and McLaren's research shows native-born American workers are attracted to areas with more immigrants and
native-born wages rise as well. "U.S. workers are actually moving from elsewhere in the country into the city that receives the immigrant inflow," Hong and McLaren wrote.
raising the real wage
"Immigration appears to be
through increased product diversity in the service industries."
Ceasing surveillance for the purpose of deportation makes our

immigration system fair and reduces strain on our legal system.
Fitz and Wolgin, Center for American Progress, 2014 [Marshall is the Director
of Immigration Policy at the Center for American Progress. Philip E. is Senior Policy
Analyst for Immigration https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/
news/2014/11/18/101098/enforcement-overdrive-has-overloaded-the-immigrationcourts/]
22

But simply increasing resources will not solve the overarching problem of roughly 200,000 immigrants needing to appear before the courts each year in the first place.
It is past time to reduce the
volume of deportation actions.

The
action should focus enforcement resources
on
serious criminals
By resourcing the
courts
and curtailing the number of people put into the system in
the first place, the nation can work toward a more functional immigration
court system.
President Barack Obamas expected executive action on immigration will hopefully begin that process by ensuring that low-priority immigrants who have been
living in the country for years can get deferred actiona temporary reprieve from deportation.
tracking down and removing
executive
also
, rather than on putting otherwise-law-abiding immigrants into the overburdened deportation system.
commensurate with their inflated caseloads
Finally, the USFG is key to solving for bad immigration policy - Only
Congress has the authority to alter our enforcement policies.
Legal Information Institute, Cornell University School of Law, 2015 [Immigration
law: an overview, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/immigration]
Federal immigration law determines
being an alien in
the United States
.
Immigration law serves as a gatekeeper for the nation's border,
. Congress has complete authority over immigration. Presidential
power does not extend beyond refugee policy.
whether a person is an alien, the rights, duties, and obligations associated with
, and how aliens gain residence or citizenship within the United States. It also provides the means by which certain aliens can become legally naturalized citizens with full rights of citizenship
determining who may enter, how long they may
stay, and when they must leave
Except for questions regarding aliens' constitutional rights, the courts have generally found the immigration
issue as nonjusticiable.
23

2AC
24

Answers To: On-Case
25

Answers To: Deportations Decreasing Now

Deportation of undocumented immigrants under the Obama
administration is still increasing.
Ewing, Senior Researcher at the American Immigration Council, 2014 [Walter,
Ph.D., is Senior Researcher at the American Immigration Council, The Growth of the U.S.
Deportation Machine, Immigration Policy Center, http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/justfacts/growth-us-deportation-machine]
Despite some highly public claims to the contrary, there has been no waning of
immigration enforcement in the United States. In fact, the U.S. deportation
machine has grown larger in recent years, indiscriminately consuming
criminals and non-criminals alike, be they unauthorized immigrants or long-time
legal permanent residents (LPRs). Deportations under the Obama administration
alone are now approaching the two-million mark. But the deportation frenzy began
long before this milestone. The federal government has, for nearly two decades, been
pursuing an enforcement-first approach to immigration control that favors mandatory
detention and deportation over the traditional discretion of a judge to consider the
unique circumstances ofevery case. The end result has been a relentless campaign of
imprisonment and expulsion aimed at noncitizensa campaign authorized by Congress
and implemented by the executive branch. While this campaign precedes the
Obama administration by many years, it has grown immensely during his
tenure in the White House. In part, this is the result of laws which have put the
expansion of deportations on automatic. But the continued growth of deportations
also reflects the policy choices of the Obama administration. Rather than putting the
brakes on this non-stop drive to deport more and more people, the
administration chose to add fuel to the fire.
26


(__)
(__) The Obama administrations actions have failed at reducing the

deportation of undocumented youth.
Merina, reporter at Southern California Public Radio, 2015 [Dorian Merina,
Despite being given priority, migrant youth still face high rate of deportation in LA's
immigration courts, http://www.scpr.org/programs/take-two/2015/05/14/42823/despitebeing-given-priority-migrant-youth-still-f/]
Nine months after the Justice Department announced a policy to speed up
cases for migrant youth, more than half the juveniles in Los Angeles'
immigration courts have nevertheless been ordered deported, according to data
obtained by KPCC. None were granted asylum. The data, acquired through a
Freedom of Information Act request from the Department of Justice, also show
that more than half of the migrant youth faced a judge without an attorney
the single most important factor in determining the outcome, according to a
2014 study by Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. The
FOIA data are from July 18, 2014, through April 20, 2015, and cover 471 completed
unaccompanied minor cases in the Los Angeles jurisdiction. All of the children were
processed through a priority docket, a designation that the Justice Department
made in 2014 in response to the surge of child migrants. Of those cases in
L.A., 287 juveniles were ordered removed. Nationwide, unaccompanied minors rose
to 68,541 in fiscal year 2014, prompting a debate over the workings of a complex and
overwhelmed immigration court system.
27


(___)
(___) The deportation process is increasing in the status quo and

continues to tear families apart, often leaving children in foster homes
Cecea, contributor to the San Diego Free Press, 2014 [Vanessa Cecea received
her Master of Social Work from the University of Southern California, Immigration,
Deportation, and Family Separation, http://sandiegofreepress.org/2014/09/immigrationdeportation-and-family-separation/]
While the numbers are astonishing, I am more shocked at the number of people
deported that have not committed a crime. Out of the 151,834 people removed
without a criminal history, 23,436 of them were already in the U.S. when
deported. ICE does not track how many of these individuals have family in the U.S., but
I imagine that it is a significant number. The increase in deportations over the years
has had an adverse effect on immigrant families, on communities and
countries of origin, as well as on communities. Deportations cause economic
hardship, emotional distress, and family separation. In addition to economic
hardship (and in many times intensified economic hardship), deportations can destroy
the family structure. Families are separated; children are left without a parent or without
both parents, in some cases. What happens to a family when the father, the primary
breadwinner, is deported, or when both parents are deported? What happens if the
parents are detained during a raid while the children are at school? As a graduate
student I researched this very topic, focusing on child welfare policies and system that
control the future of some of these children. In November 2011, the Applied Research
Center (now known as Race Forward: The Center for Racial Justice Innovation) published
a report, Shattered Families: The Perilous Intersection of Immigration Enforcement and
the Child Welfare System, that explored in great depth the effects of deportation and the
increasing number of immigrant children from mixed status families entering the foster
care system. Mixed status refers to a family whose members have different immigration
status. For example, the parents and the oldest child may be undocumented, whereas
the youngest children are U.S. citizens. According to the ARCs report, there are at
least 5,100 children in foster care due to a parent being deported or detained.
It estimates that another 15,000 children will enter the foster care system
within the next five years. The likelihood of these children being reunified with family
is slim.
28

29

Answers To: Illegal Immigration Hurts the Economy

(__)
(__) Undocumented immigrants are good for the economy because they
essential to the labor force, agriculture, and bring in millions in tax
revenue.
Goodman, author and journalist, 2014 [H. A. Goodman is an author and journalist
who studied International Relations at USC and worked for a brief stint at the U.S.
Department of State's Foreign Service Institute, Illegal immigrants benefit the U.S.
economy, http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/foreign-policy/203984-illegalimmigrants-benefit-the-us-economy]
According to the Pew Research Hispanic Trends Project, there were 8.4 million
unauthorized immigrants employed in the U.S.; representing 5.2 percent of the
U.S. labor force (an increase from 3.8 percent in 2000). Their importance was
highlighted in a report by Texas Comptroller Susan Combs that stated, Without the
undocumented population, Texas work force would decrease by 6.3 percent
and Texas gross state product would decrease by 2.1 percent. Furthermore,
certain segments of the U.S. economy, like agriculture, are entirely dependent
upon illegal immigrants. The U.S. Department of Agriculture states that, about half
of the hired workers employed in U.S. crop agriculture were unauthorized, with
the overwhelming majority of these workers coming from Mexico. The USDA
has also warned that, any potential immigration reform could have significant impacts
on the U.S. fruit and vegetable industry. From the perspective of National Milk Producers
Federation in 2009, retail milk prices would increase by 61 percent if its
immigrant labor force were to be eliminated. Echoing the Department of Labor, the
USDA, and the National Milk Producers Federation, agricultural labor economist James S.
Holt made the following statement to Congress in 2007: The reality, however, is that if
we deported a substantial number of undocumented farm workers, there
would be a tremendous labor shortage. In terms of overall numbers, The
Department of Labor reports that of the 2.5 million farm workers in the U.S., over
half (53 percent) are illegal immigrants. Growers and labor unions put this figure at
70 percent. But what about the immense strain on social services and money spent on
welfare for these law breakers? The Congressional Budget Office in 2007 answered this
question in the following manner: Over the past two decades, most efforts to
estimate the fiscal impact of immigration in the United States have concluded
that, in aggregate and over the long term, tax revenues of all types generated
by immigrantsboth legal and unauthorizedexceed the cost of the services
they use. According to the New York Times, the chief actuary of the Social Security
Administration claims that undocumented workers have contributed close to 10%
30

($300 billion) of the Social Security Trust Fund. Finally, the aggregate economic
impact of illegal immigration is debatable, but any claim that theyve ruined the country
doesnt correlate to the views of any notable economist. An open letter to President
George W. Bush in 2006, signed by around five hundred economists (including
five Nobel laureates) stated the following: While a small percentage of
native-born Americans may be harmed by immigration, vastly more Americans
benefit from the contributions that immigrants make to our economy, including
lower consumer prices.
31


(__)
(__) Immigrants boost the U.S gross domestic product and reduce the
debt.
Fitz, Wolgin, and Oakford, Center for American Progress, 2013 [Marshall Fitz,
Philip E. Wolgin, and Patrick Oakford, Immigrants Are Makers, Not Takers,
americanprogress.org/issues/immigration /news/2013/02/08/52377/immigrants-aremakers-not-takers/]
Immigrants are a net positive to the economy Here are just a few examples of how
immigrants pay more into the U.S. economy than they take out. Large GDP gains and tax
revenue from legalization Research by UCLA Professor Ral Hinojosa-Ojeda shows
that legalizing our nations undocumented immigrant population and
reforming our legal immigration system would add a cumulative $1.5 trillion to
U.S. GDP over a decade. These big gains occur because legalized workers earn higher
wages than undocumented workers, and they use those wages to buy things such as
houses, cars, phones, and clothing. As more money flows through the U.S.
economy, businesses grow to meet the demand for more goods and services,
and more jobs and economic value are created. Hinojosa-Ojeda found that the tax
benefits alone from legalization would be between $4.5 billion and $5.4 billion
in the first three years. Big economic boost from the DREAM Act Research by Notre
Dame economists Juan Carlos Guzmn and Raul Jara finds that passing the DREAM Act
would add $329 billion to the U.S. economy by 2030. The DREAM Act provides a double
boost to the economy: First, DREAMers will be able to work legally (generally at higher
wages), and second, because of the requirements to complete high school and some
college or military service, they will have more education and training, which translates
into better and higher-paying jobs. All of these extra wages circulate through the
economy, supporting new job creation for the native born as well. Naturalized citizens
earn even more A large body of literature illustrates that naturalized citizens are more
economically beneficial than even legal permanent residents. In the United States the
University of Southern Californias Manuel Pastor estimated that naturalized citizens earn
between 8 percent and 11 percent higher wages after naturalization. Pastor concludes
that if even half of those who are currently eligiblethe Department of
Homeland Security estimates that there are more than 8.5 million people in
this categorybecame citizens, it would add between $21 billion and $45
billion to the U.S. economy over five years. Even undocumented immigrants
pay taxes Immigrantseven the undocumentedpay a significant amount of money in
taxes each year. A 2011 study by the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy
found that undocumented immigrants paid $11.2 billion in state and local
taxes in 2010 alone, adding a significant amount of money to help state and
local finances. It is important to note that immigrantseven legal immigrantsare
32

barred from most social services, meaning that they pay to support benefits they cannot
receive. Immigrants help keep Social Security solvent According to the National
Foundation for American Policy, immigrants will add a net of $611 billion to the
Social Security system over the next 75 years. Immigrants are a key driver of
keeping the Social Security Trust Fund solvent, and Stuart Anderson of the National
Foundation for American Policy finds that cutting off immigration to the
country would increase the size of the Social Security deficit by 31 percent
over 50 years.
33


(__)
(__) Immigrants create new jobs by creating businesses and spending money in
the economy
Service Employees International Union 2015 ["They take our jobs" -- Debunking
Immigration Myths, http://www.seiu.org/a/immigration/they-take-our-jobs-debunkingimmigration-myths.php]
"They take our jobs" -- Debunking Immigration Myths MYTH #1 "Immigrants take our
jobs" THE FACTS: The largest wave of immigration to the U.S. since the early
1900s coincided with our lowest national unemployment rate and fastest
economic growth. Immigrants create new jobs by forming new businesses,
buying homes, spending their incomes on American goods and services, paying
taxes and raising the productivity of U.S. businesses. In fact, between 1990
and 2004, roughly 9 out of 10 native-born workers with at least a high school
diploma experienced wage gains because of increased immigration. A legal flow
of immigrants based on workforce demand strengthens the U.S. economy by keeping
productivity high and countering negative impacts as the U.S. aging population swells. Of
the twenty occupations that will see the largest growth in the next seven years, twelve of
them only require on-the-job-training--including jobs in SEIU's core industries like home
care, cleaning/janitorial services, child care, and hospitality services. But as native-born
workers seek higher education and move up the occupational ladder, the number of
native-born workers seeking employment in these industries has shrunk. The problem
with today's economy is not immigrants; the problem is our broken
immigration laws that allow big business to exploit workers who lack legal
status, driving down wages for all workers. If every immigrant were required
to get into the system, pay their dues, and become U.S. citizens, we could
block big business' upper hand, eliminate the two-tiered workforce, and build
a united labor movement that raises wages and living standards for all
workers.
(__) Immigrants are the backbone of immigration and are the biggest
contributors to new startups
Service Employees International Union 2015 ["They take our jobs" -- Debunking
Immigration Myths, http://www.seiu.org/a/immigration/they-take-our-jobs-debunkingimmigration-myths.php]
MYTH #6 "Immigrants are Uneducated, Low-Skilled and Building a Permanent
Underclass" THE FACTS: In 2000, roughly 12.5 million legal immigrants in the
United States had more than a high school education, and accounted for half of all
immigrants living in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
34

(OECD) countries.14 Immigrants have had a disproportionate role in innovation
and technology and have fuelled growth of new businesses. Half of Silicon
Valley start-ups were founded by immigrants--including Yahoo, eBay and
Google. According to the U.S. Census and analysis by the Immigration Policy Center, "In
2002, 1.6 million Hispanic-owned firms provided jobs to 1.5 million employees,
had receipts of $222 billion, and generated payroll of $36.7 billion. The same
year, 1.1 million Asian-owned firms provided jobs to 2.1 million employees, had
receipts of $326.4 billion, and generated payroll of $56 billion."15
35

Answers To: ICE improving now

(__)
(__) ICE has not improved it continues to deport innocent individuals without
a proper hearing.
American Immigration Council 2014 [Misplaced Priorities: Most Immigrants Deported
by ICE in 2013 Were a Threat to No One, http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/justfacts/misplaced-priorities-most-immigrants-deported-ice-2013-were-threat-no-one]
As ICEs own statistics make clear, the agency is involved primarily in the
apprehension and deportation of people who have committed immigration
violations and minor crimesnot terrorist operatives or violent criminals. But
recognizing this is only the first step in understanding the way ICE functions. The next
step is to examine how ICE carries out deportations. For instance, in FY 2013, 101,000
(or 27 percent) of the people whom ICE deported were summarily removed
from the country via an order of expedited removal, and 159,624 (43 percent)
were removed through a reinstated final order of removal, neither of which
generally affords the deportee a hearing in court. In other words, seven out of
every ten deportees in FY 2013 never had the opportunity to plead their cases
before an immigration judge. Not only is ICE deporting people who arent a
threat, but its deporting many of them in ways that dont respect the full
range of legal rights which form the basis of the U.S. criminal justice system.
36

Answers To: ICE improving now

(__)
(__) Even with changes to the ICE they have continued to monitor and deport
undocumented immigrants at an alarming rate.
Bernstein, NY Public Defender, 2013 [Joanna Zuckerman Bernstein,
http://mic.com/articles/22258/immigration-reform-a-record-409-849-deportationshappened-in-2012-a-clear-sign-we-need-change]
A few administrative changes announced before the New Year also indicate a shift
toward reform, although they were met with some skepticism. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) said that its detainer policy would now focus on
undocumented people with prior criminal convictions. An immigration detainer
mandates that local law enforcement hold an undocumented immigrant in custody until
ICE decides whether to begin deportation proceedings. Advocates have long considered
this program deeply flawed, as it can result in deportation and the separation of
families for such low-level offenses as a traffic violation. ICE also announced that it
would be greatly reducing the 287(g) program, which authorized local police to question
people about their immigration status. While the changes were welcomed by
advocates, their excitement was tempered by ICEs release on the same day
of startling figures on deportations in 2012. Last year, 409,849 people were
deported a new record. Moreover, advocates recognize that these changes
wont necessarily mean less enforcement: for example, by reducing the 287(g)
program, ICE will simply be concentrating more on immigration enforcement in
local jails. (In fact, a report by the Migration Policy Institute released this week
found that the U.S. government spends more on immigration enforcement
agencies than on the other main criminal law enforcement agencies
including the FBI and the DEA combined.)
37

Answers To: State laws deter immigration

(__)
(__) Federal action solves for state level immigration programs States cant
monitor immigrants without federal information.
Kalhan, Associate Professor of Law, Drexel University, 2014 [IMMIGRATION
SURVEILLANCE, 74 Md. L. Rev. 1 (2014),
http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mlr/vol74/iss1/2]
Interoperable databases now play a powerful role in federal programs to enlist
state and local law enforcement and corrections officers in the identification of
potentially deportable noncitizens by enabling automatic, routine, and
effectively mandatory immigration status determinations by these officers in the
course of their day-to-day responsibilities. Under DHSs Secure Communities program,
fingerprints that are recorded and transmitted to the FBIs IAFIS database (to obtain
identification and criminal history information as part of the typical post-arrest booking
process) are now simultaneously transmitted to DHS for comparison against records in
IDENT. If the fingerprints match a record in IDENTor even if there is no match, but the
individual has an unknown or non-U.S. place of birththe system automatically flags the
record for further review. Based on enforcement priorities and other factors, ICE
may decide to initiate removal proceedings against the individual and issue a
detainer requesting that the state or local agency hold the individual for
transfer of custody. A second automated immigration policing program enables
automatic identification of suspected immigration law violators by including
automatic searches of civil immigration records whenever state and local law
enforcement officers search the NCIC to obtain information on criminal history and
outstanding warrants on individuals who they encounter. Both programs have been
implemented in a manner that makes participation effectively mandatory for
states and localities.195 Immigration Benefits Applications. Just as the State
Department does with individuals applying for visas and refugee status from overseas,
DHS, through USCIS, collects, stores, analyzes, and disseminates significant
amounts of personal information from individuals affirmatively applying for
parole, adjustment of status, asylum, employment authorization, lawful
permanent resident status, naturalization, and other immigration benefits
within the United States. USCIS maintains and tracks benefits applications using its
Central Index System, which is able to access over fifty-seven million records concerning
the individuals who have applied for these immigration benefits in a variety of different
case management database systems.196 Collection of fingerprints from immigration
benefits applicants has become routine, and serious consideration has been given to
routine collection of other biometric data, most notably DNA.197 Officials conduct
background checks against a variety of other government databases.198 USCIS has even
38

used social networking platforms to conduct surveillance on individuals seeking to
naturalize. The agency has instructed its officials to friend petitioners for
naturalization and their beneficiaries on social networks in an apparent effort
to detect potential grounds upon which those petitions might be denied, such
as the failure to meet the legal standard for a genuine marriage.
39


(__)
(__) The federal government controls what immigration matters are delegated
to the states.
Wong, Assistant Professor of Political Science, 2014
[The Politics of Interior Immigration Enforcement, California Journal of Politics and Policy,
6(3), https://escholarship.org/uc/item/83c0g65q#page-2]
As the enforcement of federal immigration laws falls within the plenary powers
of the federal government, states and localities have mostly played a secondary
role in contemporary immigration law enforcement (state-level laws like Arizonas SB
1070 and the Secure Communities program are notable exceptions). However, in
attempting to address what Coleman (2007) describes as the deter- ritorialized tangle
of law enforcement practices that characterizes interior immigration enforcement in the
US, local law enforcement agencies were given more authority over immigration matters
under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of
1996. Section 287(g) of IIRIRA gave ICE the ability to train local law enforcement
officers to enforce federal immigration laws. More technically, it authorized DHS
to enter into agreements (via memorandums of agreement) with state and local
law enforcement agencies permitting cross-designated officers to perform
immigration law functions, provided that they received the appropriate
training under the supervision of ICE.
40


(__)
(___) Local cooperation with federal officials is what makes deportation

possible
Sakuma, national reporter at msnbc, 2014
[Amanda, Safe haven keeps immigrant families together,
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/daniel-neyoy-sanctuary-keeping-families-together]
According to a report out by Syracuse Universitys Transactional Records Access

Clearinghouse (TRAC), 47,249 of the total deportations last year were triggered by traffic
violations, not violent crime. A separate New York Times review of Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) deportation statistics, found that two-thirds of the nearly 2
million deportations under the Obama administration targeted people who committed
minor offenses. Some had no criminal record at all. A number of traffic-related
arrests stem from a 2012 program called Secure Communities. Under the
program, local law enforcement shares any information on undocumented
immigrants in their communities, including fingerprints, with federal officials.
That places anyone slapped with a speeding ticket or fine on ICEs radar. The effort was
supposed to pinpoint undocumented criminals in the system, but when
congregants started disappearing from their church communities, faith leaders
began to take notice. The backlash to Secure Communities spawned a new
wave of what is known as the Sanctuary Movement a collection of interfaith
organizations fighting for the rights of immigrant communities. Folks came
together in their faith spaces because when undocumented people began being
deported by police, the first thing they did was turn to the church, said Nicole
Kligerman, a community organizer for the New Sanctuary Movement based out of
Philadelphia. Mirroring success stories from New Orleans, Newark and Miami, the New
Sanctuary Movement in Philadelphia worked to cut off a local law enforcement
pipeline to ICE agents. After organizers lobbied city officials for more than five years,
Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter issued an executive order in April
mandating that city police would no longer detain immigrants for ICE officials
to take them into custody. Federal agents must now present a warrant.
41

Answers To: Ending surveillance causes am inefficient

system
(__)
(__) The federal government mandate to monitor and detain undocumented

immigrants is the root cause of our immigration systems inefficiencies
Robbins, reporter at NPR, 2013
[Ted Robbins, Little-Known Immigration Mandate Keeps Detention Beds Full,
http://www.npr.org/2013/11/19/245968601/little-known-immigration-mandate-keepsdetention-beds-full]
Imagine your city council telling the police department how many people it had
to keep in jail each night. That's effectively what Congress has told U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement with a policy known as the "detention bed
mandate." The mandate calls for filling 34,000 beds in some 250 facilities across the
country, per day, with immigrant detainees. When NPR visited the Department of
Homeland Security's detention center in Florence, Ariz., hundreds of men nearly all
from Latin America were lining up for lunch. They were caught by the Border
Patrol or, if apprehended away from the border, by local police and
Immigration and Customs Enforcement. People can stay behind the razor-wire
fences for days, weeks or years. NPR was not allowed to talk with anyone in the
detention center, but Francisco Rincon, who was recently released from Florence on
bond, says he was in the facility for three weeks. Every day he was in detention cost
taxpayers at least $120. Add up all the nation's detention centers and that's
more than $2 billion a year. The detention bed mandate, which began in 2009, is
just part of the massive increase in enforcement-only immigration policies
over the last two decades. The last time Congress passed a broad immigration law
dealing with something other than enforcement such as overhauling visa or guest
worker policies was 1986.
42

Answers To: Ending surveillance causes am inefficient

system
(__)
(__) Spending on immigration enforcement wont solve the problem

attempting to deport undocumented immigrants is costly and grossly
inefficient.
Immigration Policy Center 2009
[BREAKING DOWN THE PROBLEMS http://immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/
Problem_Paper_FINAL_102109.pdf]
For more than two decades, the U.S. government has tried to stamp out
unauthorized immigration through enforcement efforts at the border and in the
interior of the country, but without success and without fundamentally reforming
the broken immigration system that spurs unauthorized immigration in the first
place. Missing has been a corresponding effort to address the inevitable pull of jobs and
family. The following five points discuss this enforcement only strategy, which has
merely deepened the crisis:
6. The United States has spent billions of dollars on ineffective border
enforcement. At the same time that spending on immigration enforcement has
skyrocketed, the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States
has roughly tripled from 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008 {Figure 2}.17
(Research has shown that recent decreases in the number of unauthorized border
crossings have little to do with enforcement, but are due primarily to the downturn in the
U.S. economy.) Furthermore, the Pew Hispanic Center estimates that between
25 percent and 40 percent of all unauthorized immigrants do not sneak across
the border, but come to the United States on valid visas and then stay after
their visas expire, meaning that border enforcement is irrelevant to a large
portion of the unauthorized population. Yet, since 1992, the annual budget of
the U.S. Border Patrol has increased by 714 percent; from $326.2 million in FY
1992 to $2.7 billion in FY 2009 {Figure 3}.19 At the same time, the number of Border
Patrol agents stationed along the southwest border has grown by 390 percent; from
3,555 in FY 1992 to 17,415 in FY 2009 {Figure 4}.
43

Answer To: Ending surveillance fuels the smuggling crisis

(__)
(__) The federal government is solving the crisis now by targeting smuggling
rings
Gonzalez, reporter at the Arizona Republic, 2014 [Daniel Gonzalez, Feds targeting
smuggling rings to combat border crisis,
usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/07/23/feds-target-smuggling-rings-combat-bordercrisis/13033789/
As part of that campaign, the government has launched a three-month initiative to
go directly after the criminal organizations that charge migrants to be
smuggled from Central America through Mexico and into the United States,
Johnson said. Since the start of the fiscal year on Oct. 1, the Rio Grande Valley Sector
accounted for nearly three-fourths of the more than 57,000 unaccompanied children
apprehended by the Border Patrol. About three-fourths of the children were from
Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala. The Border Patrol also has apprehended more
than 55,000 children and adults traveling in families; roughly 90 percent from those
same three countries. To help go after money-laundering operations, Johnson said
the Department of Homeland Security has deployed 60 additional special
agents and support personnel to the Rio Grande Valley. They are investigating
organizations smuggling illegal immigrants from Central America and other countries.
Since the initiative started June 23, federal authorities have arrested 192
people involved in smuggling operations and seized more than $625,000 in
smuggling profits from 288 bank accounts, Johnson said. "We are interdicting
the flow of money that goes to these smuggling organizations," he said. Adam
Isacson, a senior associate for regional security policy at the Washington
Office on Latin America, said targeting profits is one of the most effective ways
to combat smuggling. "It could certainly disrupt some of the traffic," Isacson
said. "Following the money is one of the best ways to really disrupt this
practice." Seizing smuggling profits makes it difficult for criminal organizations
to continue operating, he said. It also forces them to charge higher fees, which
could deter some migrants by making the cost of the trip to the U.S.
unaffordable, he said.
44

Answer To: Ending surveillance fuels the smuggling crisis

(__) Individuals will inevitably try to enter the United States because
they are fleeing violence.
Davidson, the director of the Center for Health Care Policy at the Texas Public
Policy Foundation, 2014 [John Daniel Davidson, The Manufactured Immigration Crisis
On The Texas Border, http://thefederalist.com/2014/06/27/the-manufacturedimmigration-crisis-on-the-texas-border/]
The first view is, of course, the one espoused by the administration. Homeland
Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told the Senate Judiciary Committee as much last
week: Violence, povertyI believe that is principally what is motivating the
situation. Johnson has a point. Most of those apprehended at the border have
traveled from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. According to U.S. Border
Patrol stats, the number of unaccompanied alien children encountered from
those countries has dramatically increased in recent years, far outpacing those coming
from Mexico. Its not hard to see why. Honduras has the highest homicide rate in
the world, while Belize, El Salvador, and Guatemala have the third, fourth, and
fifth highest, respectively. Although it can be difficult to get accurate Englishlanguage news reports from Central America, some Spanish-language news outlets
have noted a recent spike in gang-related violenceand in this context, gang
violence is akin to terrorist attacks or conflicts between armed militias.
(__) The root cause of smuggling crisis is poverty and gang violence and
continuing to deport people will do nothing to solve it.
Hing, reporter for Colorlines, 2014 [Julianne Hing, Three Myths of the Unaccompanied
Minors Crisis, Debunked, colorlines.com/articles/three-myths-unaccompanied-minors-crisisdebunked]
However, humanitarian groups like the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
and the Women's Refugee Commission have noted the jump in unaccompanied
minor border crossings since late 2011 (PDF), long before Obama announced DACA
in June of 2012. What's more, in interviews with hundreds of detained youth, multiple
agencies and researchers have found that the vast majority have no idea
about the existence of DACA, let alone the notion that they might take advantage of it
for themselves. Some have also theorized that smugglers are advertising DACA or the
Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA), a Bush-era law which allows
unaccompanied minors to be released into the custody of family or a sponsor while they
await a deportation hearing in front of a judge, as the U.S. laying out the welcome mat
for migrant children. In a House Homeland Security Committee hearing last week,
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson gave credence to the theory
that the influx is due in part to migrants swayed by smugglers' false "promisos" of a
free pass once they arrive in the U.S. Smugglers may be using the falsehood to
drum up business for themselves, says Michelle Bran, the director of the Women's
45

Refugee Commission's Migrant Rights and Justice program, but endemic gang violence
and abject poverty are the decisive motivating factors creating the demand for
their services. "People decide to leave first, and then they look for a way to
leave," says Bran. "Just because [migrants] think the U.S. is nicer than we
actually are doesn't mean that they don't need protection and don't qualify for
protection," says Bran.
46

Answers To: ICE reducing rights violations

(__)
(__) Despite reforms, current U.S immigration deportation and surveillance

policies still commit thousands of human rights abuses every year
Constable, reporter for The Washington Post, 2014
[Pamela Constable, Human Rights Watch, in report on world abuses, criticizes U.S.
immigration laws, http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/human-rights-watch-in-reporton-world-abuses-criticizes-us-immigration-laws/2014/01/23/95c3ec6a-8459-11e3-9dd4e7278db80d86_story.html]
Ginatta: We see the intersection between human rights and immigration policy to be
varied and vast. The status quo on immigration breeds human rights violation in
so many circles. First we highlight the importance of family unity. In the world of human
rights, family is seen as the natural and fundamental group that deserves
protection, but [U.S.] immigration policy doesnt focus on family unity in the
same respect. Immigration judges are not allowed to consider family unity to
the extent we think is needed to protect human rights. In the case of a very minor
or very old criminal conviction, family ties dont matter. Even if someone has close U.S.
citizen family members, the removal still takes priority. We have documented
situations where people who have been outstanding members of society, with
multiple U.S. citizen children, and who have lived here for decades, still get
deported. WP: What other kinds of immigration policies or practices would you say fall
into the category of human rights problems? Ginatta: One area is violations in the
workplace. Workers are incredibly vulnerable to exploitation because of their
immigration status. People working in dangerous industries may be afraid to report
serious workplace violations or women, such as farm workers, may be afraid to report
sexual assaults, for fear they will be reported to immigration authorities and deported.
There is also the right to remedy. This is a key human rights principle. You should have
the right to access law enforcement, and policies that create a fear or block
between a person who witnesses a crime or is a victim of a crime and the
police are human rights violations. We have documented many situations where
people are afraid to contact the police because they fear a contact about a crime will
become an inquiry into their immigration status. WP: Do you see the deportation of
illegal immigrants as a human rights abuse? We are very worried about the growth of
criminal prosecutions of illegal entrants into the U.S.. This is a federal crime and now
people who are trying to come into the U.S. to be reunited with their families are facing
federal prison time. These prosecutions have spiked to almost 100,000 a year.
47

They are changing the population within federal prisons. Immigration is
becoming the most prosecuted federal crime, and Latinos are becoming the
number one ethnic group inside federal prisons because of this.
48

Answers To: ICE reducing rights violations

(__)
(__) ICE has only become more corrupt as their employees have been caught
using information obtained from surveillance to aid drug cartels.
McElhatton, reporter at the Washington Times, 2014
[Jim, Immigration agents accused of database abuse; cartels make corruption easy,
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/6/i mmigration-agents-accused-ofdatabase-abuse-carte/print/]
At least a half-dozen federal immigration agents have come under investigation since
2012 for snooping into law enforcement databases computer misconduct ranging
from "self queries" to accusations that one of them tried to use the databases to warn
drug smugglers if they were under investigation. The information, gleaned from highly
redacted records obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, includes the investigation of
one Customs and Border Protection officer tied to a "drug-trafficking organization that
has utilized compromised law-enforcement officers in the past." Border analyst James
Phelps, a professor at Angelo State University, estimates that as many as 300 law
enforcement officers are under investigation for corruption near the border. He also
said that having an insider with access to a law enforcement computer makes it easier to lure the
next corrupt officer. "How do you corrupt someone like that? It's real easy," Mr. Phelps said. "You
offer them more money in a weekend than they make in an entire year." "If you can get a hold of
a person's driver's license, you can find out everything the works," he said. "If the cartels can
identify an agent by name and find out where they live, they can come and make an offer," Mr.
Phelps said. "Take our money and turn a blind eye, or we kill your mom. Down in Mexico, the
cartels have no problem doing that, and that's where you have a lot of agents fail." Customs and
Border Protection did not respond to messages seeking comment Wednesday or Thursday.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials were unable to discuss specific cases
summarized in records obtained by The Times. "ICE agents and officers are held to the highest
standards of professional and ethical conduct," ICE spokeswoman Gillian Christensen said. "The
agency does not tolerate misconduct, and reports of any such actions are swiftly investigated
and dealt with appropriately." The Times obtained the information as part of an investigation of
computer misuse among federal employees. The majority of cases at other agencies reveal
misdeeds like looking at pornography in the office, but the computer misconduct at ICE and
CBP largely stemmed from improper access to electronic law-enforcement records.
Several of the reports in the data provided to The Times were almost entirely redacted, making it
impossible to tell the true scope of the problem though the violations described involved
"improper entry by alien," "bringing in or harboring certain aliens" and fraud. Some of the
snooping cases involved officers looking up their own names in law-enforcement computers,
which is prohibited, but other examples hinted at a larger corruption problem. In one case,
investigators were tipped off about an official whose name and job title were
redacted using his or her position to "conduct queries for friends and relatives
engaged in criminal activity." The same report included information from an FBI special agent
who reported that a credible witness alleged the official was accessing "sensitive law
49

enforcement information in order to warn friends and relatives of impending law
enforcement activity." That accusation was deemed "substantiated." Insider threats
remain a concern at CBP, where officials say corrupt employees accessing databases
and IT systems can facilitate the flow of drugs across the border and even disclose
gate codes, according to a redacted audit by the Department of Homeland Security IG
last year.
50

Answers To: States have a right to deport

(__)
(__) Even if states have the right to deport there is no moral justification for
the violent means by which mass deportations are carried out.
Velasquez, The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity, 2014 [Jean-Claude
Velasquez, The Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity Honorable Mention Recipient, The
Invisible & Voiceless: The Plight of the Undocumented Immigrant in America,
http://business-ethics.com/2014/09/30/1944-the-invisible-voiceless-the-plight-of-theundocumented-immigrant-in-america/]
Mass deportation of undocumented immigrants only instills terror in the
immigrant community and it is an expensive, impractical, and inefficient policy.
Nevertheless, numerous politicians advocate for such sweeping exclusionary measures.
Deportation should only be limited to serious criminal offenders; hardworking individuals
must not be subjected to such harsh consequences for merely pursuing a better life for
themselves and for their children. As a nation of justice and fairness, what do we
have to say to the millions of children who have to worry every day about the
fact that their parents might not come home? And what do we have to say to the
parents who face the prospect of being torn from their children? As long as the United
States is a free and prosperous nation, immigrants will venture to pursue the American
Dream, even if the cost is political non-existence or, as Jorge Ramos says, they become
invisibles for the sake of a better life.
A sweeping study conducted by The Center for American Progress revealed compelling
evidence of the extraordinary costs of mass deportation. The cost to apprehend the
millions of undocumented will require Gestapo-style raids at workplaces and
homes ultimately costing $158 billion [8]. Housing these undocumented at
detention centers will cost $29 billion and an extra $7 billion will be accrued through
legal proceeding costs [9].The transportation cost of all the undocumented to their
native country has a price tag of $6 billion [10]. Furthermore, the cost of continuingenforcement over a five-year period will be over $85 billion [11]. In other words, the
total cost over five years: $285 billion, would mean new taxes of $922 for every man,
woman, and child in our country.[12] These calculations were conducted for the fiscal
year of 2008; therefore, the present day cost will be significantly higher due to inflation.
The monetary costs of mass deportation are mind boggling, but what should strike
concern in the heart of the citizen is how his or her tax dollars will be used: the
persecution of every undocumented child, woman, and man, rallied up like cattle to
ultimately meet their fate of deportation. The world would watch in awe as the
greatest exemplar of freedom treats a portion of her population as some kind
51

of unwanted pest and as human rights violations occur. The most terrifying aspect
of mass deportation is the modus operandi: imagine immigration officers armed to
the teeth raiding meat packing factories, homes of the wealthy, and farms, all
common workplaces for the undocumented. The butcher, nanny, and grape picker
would be punished for the sole reason of working and being in the country illegally.
52

Answer To: States have a right to deport

(__)
(__) The human rights of immigrants are a national security concern because
the abuses we allow to happen to immigrants erode the very foundation of U.S
democracy.
Jonas and Tactaquin, Professor of Latin American and Latino Studies at

UC-Santa Cruz and Director of the National Network for Immigrant and
Refugee Rights ,2004
[Susanne and Catherine, Social Justice Vol. 31, Nos. 12 (2004),
http://www.socialjusticejournal.org/archive/95_31_1-2/95_09Jonas.pdf]
Given these developments, U.S. citizens and U.S. society as a whole are beginning to
suffer from the ever-expanding logic that initially targeted the most vulnerable
(immigrants and noncitizens). Lani Guinier and Gerald Torres eloquently argue this
point in their book, The Miners Canary : upon the death of the little (vulnerable) canary
sent into the mine to detect noxious gasses, miners know they too are vulnerable to
being poisoned. Following this metaphor, even full-fledged citizens of a society that
institutionalizes violations of basic, constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties
against noncitizens (rollback of habeas corpus and due process protections,
proposals to repeal the 14th Amendment, etc.) cannot be fully safe from
arbitrary, antidemocratic abuses. Beyond citizens obvious self-interest, the
treatment of immigrants and noncitizens affects the quality of democracy in
the U.S. It is unhealthy for the fabric of a society to have a rapidly and everincreasing mass of undocumented or in limbo migrants who are regarded with
suspicion and excluded from its benefits. Many of them have lived and worked here for
15 to 20 years; their children may be citizens and their labor (with or without legal
papers) is essential to sustaining our economy and that of their home country. Yet they
are unable to participate in U.S. public life, are politically unrepresented, and are denied
a path to legalization and eventual naturalization a situation that would be
perpetuated if the 2004 Bush initiative on guest workers from Mexico were to be
approved. As has been seen in other times in other countries, the exclusion of
immigrants based on racialization is an inherent affront to democracy. It was
impossible to consider South Africa a democracy (even for its white citizens) so
long as it was an apartheid regime. In the U.S. today, it is no longer possible to
pursue punitive/repressive strategies against Third World immigrants and noncitizens
without damaging the quality of democracy for citizens. In short, the challenge of
reframing the issues of immigrant rights in the shadow of the national security
53

state is one that should be of concern to all U.S. citizens and throughout the
Americas it will remain on our 21st-century public policy agenda.
54

Answer To: Curtailing surveillance makes immigration

courts worse
(__)
(__) Immigration courts are overwhelmed because there has been a surge of
Central Americans fleeing violence and the Obama administration is putting
money to fix the immigration court system now.
Kulkarni and Conrad, Public Radio International, 2014
[Here's an explanation about why there's a backlog of immigration cases,
http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-08-13/heres-explanation-about-why-theres-backlogimmigration-cases].
The recent wave of migrants crossing the US-Mexico border tests any already
overwhelmed US judicial system. Many Central Americans crossing the
southern US border are hoping to avoid violence back home. According to the
Executive Office of Immigration Review, which handles immigration courts and receives
these requests, courts are so backlogged, that some migrants are waiting until 2018 to
have their case heard. This means that immigration judges are working with major
caseloads around 1,400 cases per judge. To solve this judicial crisis, the White
House recently proposed a $3.7 billion plan that tackles this influx of migrants,
with funding to various government departments. Pending Congressional
approval, part of this funding would allow the Department of Justice to hire more
immigration judges to ease their case load and to quickly go through these immigration
cases.
55

Answer To: Curtailing surveillance makes immigration

courts worse
(__)
(__) Lack of federal action on hiring judges is the root of the problem
Mencimer, reporter for Mother Jones, 2014
[Stephamie, Why Our Immigration Courts Can't Handle the Child Migrant Crisis, Mother
Jones http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/immigration-courts-backlog-childmigrant-crisis]
Immigration judges can expect to handle 1,500 cases at any given time. By
comparison, Article I federal district judges handle about 440 cases, and they
get several law clerks to help manage the load. Immigration judges have to share a
single clerk with two or three other judges. (For more, see Casey Miner's "Judges on the
Verge of a Nervous Breakdown" from our November/December 2010 issue.) The lack of
staffing creates an irony that seems to be lost on the current Congress: Too
few judges means that people with strong cases languish for years waiting for
them to get resolved, while people with weak cases who should probably be
sent home quickly get to stay in the United States a few years waiting for a
decision. That dynamic is only getting compounded with the recent influx of
unaccompanied juveniles, who usually don't have lawyers to represent them in court.
"It's ironic and counterintuitive that we should not give enough money to the
system to allow it to work more quickly," says Dana Marks, an immigration
judge in San Francisco and president of the National Association of
Immigration Judges. In 2010, the American Bar Association called on Congress and the
White House to immediately initiate the hiring of at least 100 new judges to help relieve
the existing crisis in the courts. Instead, Congress failed to deal with the budget of
any agency, sequestration happened, and the Justice Department started a
hiring freeze that didn't end until December 2013, even though at least 100
sitting immigration judges are eligible to retire this year. Meanwhile, the
comprehensive immigration bill passed in the Senate last year would have added 225
new judges to the immigration courts over three years (along with clerks and support
staff), but Republicans killed the bill in the House. Today, there are 243 judgesjust
13 more than in 2006 and 21 fewer than at the end of 2012and more than 30
vacancies the government is trying to fill. All this despite the fact that the
immigration court backlog has increased nearly 120 percent since 2006. And
that was before the kids started coming. Last week, TRAC reported that the official
immigration court backlog in June hit 375,503, up by 50,000 since the start of 2013.
Among the languishing cases: more than 12,000 kids each from Guatemala, El Salvador,
56

and Honduras. All told, more than 40,000 cases in the current court backlog involve
children, and the numbers are growing. The average time an immigration case has been
pending is now up to 587 days.
57

Answers to: Curtailing surveillance leads to violent militias

(__) Even during times of intense immigration the amount of militias has
fallen.
Murphy, reporter for Mother Jones, 2014 [Tim, The Meltdown of the AntiImmigration Minuteman Militia,
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/08/minuteman-movement-border-crisissimcox]
During the past four years, the Minuteman groups that defined conservative
immigration policy during the mid-to-late-2000s have mostly self-destructed
sometimes spectacularly so. Founding Minuteman leaders are in prison, facing
criminal charges, dead, or sidelined. "It really attracted a lot of people that had
some pretty extreme issues," says Juanita Molina, executive director of the Border Action
Network, an advocacy group that provides aid to migrants in the desert. "We saw the
movement implode on itself mostly because of that." An analysis by the
Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors right-wing extremist groups,
found that the number of Minuteman groups in the Southwest had declined
from 310 to 38 between 2010 and 2012.
(__) Group infighting and law enforcement efforts prevent the rise of
militias
Southern Poverty Law Center 2014
Intelligence Report, Spring 2014, Issue Number: 153, Nativist Extremist Groups Decline
Again, http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-allissues/2014/spring/Nativist-Extremist-Groups-Decline-Again]
The movement of nativist extremist groups anti-immigration organizations
that go beyond mere advocacy to confront suspected undocumented immigrants and
those who hire or help them reached its vitriolic peak in 2010, when it counted some
319 groups. Since then, the movement has declined rapidly, a trend that continued
in 2013, when there were just 33 of the organizations. The decline, like that
seen in earlier years, was due to movement infighting, the adoption of many of
the movements goals by state legislatures like those of Arizona and Alabama, and
criminal scandals. The worst of those scandals was the 2011 Arizona murder of a
Latino man and his 9-year-old daughter by a group led by Shawna Forde, the head of
Minuteman American Defense who now sits on death row. But in 2013, another
important leader, Chris Simcox of the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, was arrested on
charges of molesting several young children. The movement last year also lost one
of its shrillest voices with the August death of Barbara Coe, the racist founder
and longtime leader of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform, which
was instrumental in passing 1994s anti-immigrant Proposition 187 in California, although
58

the measure was killed later. Coe, who was also a member of the segregationist Council
of Conservative Citizens and a one-time board member of the border-patrolling
Minuteman Project, was known for baseless rants about immigrants like this 2005
keeper: We are suffering robbery, rape and murder of law-abiding citizens at the hands
of illegal barbarians who are cutting off the heads and appendages of blind, white,
disabled gringos. Most of the patrolling of the borders carried out by the
Minutemen and related groups has now ended, but a border vigilante who
identified himself as a militia Minuteman was arrested last August after pointing a
military-style assault rifle at a sheriffs deputy during a desert confrontation.
59

Answers to: Curtailing surveillance leads to violent militias

(__)
(__) The biggest reason why violent militias increased was the recession not
immigration
Bennet, Meredith Professor of History at the Maxwell School, Syracuse
University, 2010 [David H. Bennett, When Government Became the Enemy,
http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/the-new-militias-vs-government/?
_r=0]
In the 1990s, with the decline of nativism and the end of the cold war, the
traditional scapegoats for right-wing extremists facing difficult times an
unassimilatable horde of un-American peoples or a treasonous band of un-American
ideologists no longer were available. It was the government itself that became the
enemy within. Now, in 2010, with unemployment hovering at 10 percent, with
the hollowing out of Americas manufacturing base not only eliminating
millions of blue-collar jobs but creating anxiety about national decline, should
it be surprising that a new Democratic administration in Washington (led by an AfricanAmerican president) calling for federal action on health care, the environment, energy
and other matters would stimulate the re-emergence of right-wing fringe
groups? Unable to deal with the complex reasons for the economic collapse,
certain that sinister forces are at work in Washington undermining American
power and selling out the nation to international enemies, the revived militia
movements look much like those that came before.
(__) An improved economy and crackdown by law enforcement has

substantially reduced the number of militias
Southern Poverty Law Center 2014 [SPLC Report: Far-right extremist groups decline
but remain at near-record levels, http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/splc-reportfar-right-extremist-groups-decline-but-remain-at-near-record-levels]
The SPLC found that the number of hate groups dropped by 7 percent from
1,007 in 2012 to 939 in 2013. Hate groups reached a peak in 2011 with 1,018 groups.
The more significant decline came within the antigovernment Patriot
movement, composed of armed militias, sovereign citizens, and other conspiracyminded organizations that see the federal government as their enemy. These groups
fell 19 percent from 1,360 groups in 2012 (an all-time high) to 1,096 in 2013. The
decline followed an unprecedented rise that began in 2008, the year President Obama
was elected, when a mere 149 Patriot groups were operating.
60

The presidents 2012 re-election unexpected by many on the right appears
to have drained energy from the movement. Other factors that apparently are
contributing to the decline are an improving economy, crackdowns by law
enforcement, and the adoption of far-right issues by mainstream politicians.
61

Answers To: Security should be prioritized over human

rights (1/2)
(__) In order to guarantee survival human rights must be protected
Balfour and Cadava, associate professor of English at York University
and Lecturer in English at Princeton, 2004
[Ian and Eduardo, The Claims of Human Rights: An Introduction. South Atlantic
Quarterly Spring/Summer 2004 pg. 279 Project Muse]
Human rights have become one of the most pressing and intractable matters of
political life, and perhaps even of life as such. We might even say that there could be
no life without human rights, without, at the very least, the right to live. This is
why, from their very beginnings, human rights have always beenwith and beyond
all the praxes that seek to secure thema way to think about what it means to
be human, and what it means to have the right both to live and to be human.
If, from the earliest declarations of the French Revolution (the generally accepted origin
of human rights discourse) to the Declaration of Universal Human Rights that followed
World War II, human rights have been continually broadened, elaborated, clarified,
and defined, it is because they repeatedly have sought to include and addressoften in
response to the suffering, dispossession, and displacement that accompany the
injustices and violence that constitute so much of the world's historynew rights. These
rights include, among many others, women's rights, minority rights, children's rights, gay
and lesbian rights, human rights beyond citizens' rights, the right to education, the right
to work, the right to political participation, the right to resistance, the right to
development, and a wide spectrum of economic and cultural rights.
(__) Cost/benefit logic justifies moral atrocities only prioritizing human

rights protects those moral horrors
Byron, Philosophy Professor at Kent State University, 2009
[Etica & Politica / Ethics & Politics, XI, 2009, 1, pp. 470-494 Human Rights: A Modest
Proposal*
Michael Byron Kent State University, http://www2.units.it/etica/2009_1/BYRON.pdf]
Human rights have become an enormously useful tool in the last century, and this for a
variety of reasons. Rights remain a moral bulwark against an overzealous
utilitarianism: where the many would sacrifice the one, rights give reason to
protect the one. The logic of cost and benefit is siren song to bureaucrats and
administrators, promising an overly easy commensuration of conflicting values,
lives, and choices. Rights talk can prevent grave moral harms from being swept
under the rug of the costs of some favored policy. In their political conception,
human rights help us understand and normalize legitimate relations between nation
states and their citizens. The language and logic of collateral damage a polite
term for the allegedly unintended destruction and murder that would pass for a side
effect of modern military actions threatens to undermine a respect for persons,
62

hiding them in blighted post-traumatic landscapes. Rights talk helps us
identify such violations. The growing literature on human rights serves also as a guide
to international relations, the cultivation of treaties, and the rhetoric of diplomacy.
Concern grows worldwide about the effects of pollution, child labor, and related harms to
people and their environments, in both developed and developing nations. Rights talk
can be a useful propaedeutic to the resolution of such disputes.
63

Answers To: Security should be prioritized over human

rights (2/2)
(__)
(__) All forms of violence can be justified in the name of security only a
human rights frame that recognized the intrinsic value of human beings
can prevent mass violence
Anderson, National Director of Probe Ministries International 2004
[Kerby, Utilitarianism: The Greatest Good for the Greatest Number

http://www.probe.org/theology-and-philosophy/worldview--philosophy/utilitarianism-thegreatest-good-for-thegreatest-number.html]
One problem with utilitarianism is that it leads to an "end justifies the means"
mentality. If any worthwhile end can justify the means to attain it, a true
ethical foundation is lost. But we all know that the end does not justify the
means. If that were so, then Hitler could justify the Holocaust because the end
was to purify the human race. Stalin could justify his slaughter of millions
because he was trying to achieve a communist utopia. The end never justifies
the means. The means must justify themselves. A particular act cannot be
judged as good simply because it may lead to a good consequence. The means
must be judged by some objective and consistent standard of morality.
Second, utilitarianism cannot protect the rights of minorities if the goal is the
greatest good for the greatest number. Americans in the eighteenth century
could justify slavery on the basis that it provided a good consequence for a
majority of Americans. Certainly the majority benefited from cheap slave labor even
though the lives of black slaves were much worse. A third problem with utilitarianism is
predicting the consequences. If morality is based on results, then we would have
to have omniscience in order to accurately predict the consequence of any
action. But at best we can only guess at the future, and often these educated
guesses are wrong. A fourth problem with utilitarianism is that consequences
themselves must be judged. When results occur, we must still ask whether
they are good or bad results. Utilitarianism provides no objective and
consistent foundation to judge results because results are the mechanism
used to judge the action itself.inviolability is intrinsically valuable.
64

65

NAUDL 2015-16
Answers to: Crime Disadvantage
Immigration enforcement increases crime

(__)
(__) Deportation makes crime worse

National Council of La Raza, 2006 [State and Local Police Enforcement of Federal
Immigration Laws: A Tool Kit for Advocates, http://www.nilc.org/document.html?id=7.]
If police become immigration agents, word will spread like wildfire among
newcomers that any contact with police could mean deportation for themselves or their
family members. Immigrants will decline to report crimes or suspicious activity,
and criminals will see them as easy prey, making our streets less safe as a
result. Experience shows that this fear will extend not only to contact with police,
but also with the fire department, hospitals, and the public school system. The
Legislation Undermines National Security Security experts and law enforcement
agree that good intelligence and strong relationships are the keys to keeping
our nation and our streets safe. Under this legislation, foreign nationals who might
otherwise be helpful to security investigations will be reluctant to come
forward, for fear of immigration consequences. If immigrant communities are
alienated rather than embraced, local law enforcement loses important
relationships that can lead to information they might not otherwise have access to. The
Legislation Weakens an Important Criminal Database Police rely upon the FBIs
National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database to give them timely and accurate
information on criminals and dangerous people. This legislation would undermine the
usefulness of the NCIC by loading it with information about millions of people
with minor immigration violations. Poor data management at the former
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has resulted in numerous
inaccurate records, further complicating matters for police who rely on the
integrity of the NCIC. Even if the data were correct upon entry, case statuses
often change and would have to somehow be updated in the FBIs database.
This mess would lead to many false hits and unlawful detentions and
arrests, wasting precious law enforcement resources.

NAUDL 2015-16

(__)
(__) Focusing on immigration distracts law enforcement from dealing with

crime
Nguyen and Gill, Phds at UNC-Chapel Hill, 2015 [Interior immigration enforcement:
The impacts of expanding local law enforcement authority,
planning.unc.edu/people/faculty/mainguyen/InteriorImmigrationEnforcement_UrbanStud
2015Nguyen0042098014563029.pdf
Some scholars argue that the inability of law enforcers to identify and track
unauthorised individuals exposes the country to homeland security and public
safety risks. They con- tend that broadening the authority of state and local law
enforcers expands interior enforcement territory and creates a force multiplier effect,
especially since state and local law enforcers are typically first respon- ders to public
safety and terrorist threats However, 287g may create competing objectives for
state and local law enforcement, detracting from their primary duties of
policing crime and securing public safety (Bolick, 2008; Nguyen and Gill, 2010;
Waslin, 2010). Questions have also been raised as to whether the focus on policing
immigration violators distracts agencies from their primary mission of protecting the
public from crime (Hincapie, 2009; Nguyen and Gill, 2010; University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill and the American Civil Liberties Union, 2009; Waslin, 2010). Furthermore,
concerns have been raised about abuses of power among local law enforcers
because of a lack of program transparency and accountability (Hincapie, 2009;
Khashu, 2009; US General Accountability Office, 2009; US Office of the Inspector
General, 2010). Motomura (2011: 1856) notes that the degree of discretion involved
when local police make arrests is proble- matic, as these gatekeepers fill . the
enforcement pipeline with cases of their choice for civil removal and possibly
criminal prosecution as well.

NAUDL 2015-16

(__)
(__) Deportations backfire and only produce more crime

Lopez, Connel, and Craul, Time Staff Writers, 2005 [ROBERT J. LOPEZ, RICH
CONNELL AND CHRIS KRAUL, Gang Uses Deportation to Its Advantage to Flourish in U.S,
http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-gang30oct30-story.html#page=1
But a deportation policy aimed in part at breaking up a Los Angeles street
gang has backfired and helped spread it across Central America and back into
other parts of the United States. Newly organized cells in El Salvador have
returned to establish strongholds in metropolitan Washington, D.C., and other U.S.
cities. Prisons in El Salvador have become nerve centers, authorities say, where
deported leaders from Los Angeles communicate with gang cliques across the
United States. A gang that once numbered a few thousand and was involved in
street violence and turf battles has morphed into an international network
with as many as 50,000 members, the most hard-core engaging in extortion,
immigrant smuggling and racketeering. In the last year, the federal government has
brought racketeering cases against MS-13 members in Long Island, N.Y., and southern
Maryland. Across the country, more than 700 MS-13 members have been arrested this
year under a new enforcement campaign that U.S. immigration authorities say will lead
to more serious cases and longer sentences for gang members before they are deported.
"Ultimately, our job here is to enforce the immigration laws and then remove [criminal
gang members] from the country," said John P. Torres, the acting director overseeing
detention and removals for the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and
Customs Enforcement agency. But for a sizable number of MS-13 members,
deportation is little more than a taxpayer-financed visit with friends and family
before returning north. "I think most of the police departments will agree that
you're just getting them off the street for a couple of months," said FBI
Assistant Director Chris Swecker, who is coordinating investigations across
North America, where the gang operates in a loose network of cells. Deportations
have helped create an "unending chain" of gang members moving between the
U.S. and Central America, said Rodrigo Avila, El Salvador's vice minister of security.
"It's a merry-go-round."

NAUDL 2015-16
Immigration Surveillance makes fighting crime harder

(__)
(__) Immigration surveillance and deportation decreases trust between

immigrant communities and law enforcement and this makes it more
difficult to combat crime.
Ferrell Jr., Deputy Director of the Houston Police Department, 2004
[Craig E., Immigration Enforcement: Is It a Local Issue?
www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/ index.cfm?f
useaction=display_arch&article_id=224&issue_id=22004]
Immigration enforcement by state and local police could have a chilling effect in
immigrant communities and could limit cooperation with police by members of
those communities. Local police agencies depend on the cooperation of
immigrants, legal and illegal, in solving all sorts of crimes and in the maintenance of
public order. Without assurances that they will not be subject to an immigration
investigation and possible deportation, many immigrants with critical information
would not come forward, even when heinous crimes are committed against them or their
families. Because many families with undocumented family members also include
legal immigrant members, this would drive a potential wedge between police
and huge portions of the legal immigrant community as well. This will be felt
most immediately in situations of domestic violence. In Houston, for example, the
police department has been addressing the difficult issues related to domestic
abuse and the reluctance of some victims to contact the police. This barrier is
heightened when the victim is an immigrant and rightly or wrongly perceives
her tormentor to wield the power to control her ability to stay in the country.
The word will get out quickly that contacting the local police can lead to deportation or
being separated by a border from one's children. Should local police begin enforcing
immigration laws, more women and children struggling with domestic violence
will avoid police intervention and help.

NAUDL 2015-16
Immigration Surveillance makes fighting crime harder

(__)
(__) Surveillance causes immigrants to distrust the police making it harder to

investigate criminal organizations.
Latino Daily News 2013
[New Study: Nearly Half of Latinos Less Likely to Report Crime Due to Immigration Fears,
http://www.hispanicallyspeakingnews.com/latino-daily-news/details/new-study-nearlyhalf-of-latinos-less-likely-to-report-crime-due-to-immigra/24339/]
Their report, Insecure Communities: Latino Perceptions of Police Involvement in
Immigration Enforcement, found that programs like Secure Communities that use
local law enforcement agencies as proxies for immigration enforcement, lead
to a growing mistrust of the policeand a disinclination to report crimes. Among the
findings of the study: 44% of respondents reported they are less likely to contact
police officers if they have been a victim of a crime for fear they or someone
they know will be asked about their immigration status 45% of respondents
indicated they are less likely to voluntarily offer information about crimes they
know have been committed because they are afraid the police officers will ask
them or someone they know about their immigration status 43% of respondents feel
less safe because local law enforcement is more involved in immigration
enforcement 38% of respondents feel afraid to leave their home because
local law enforcement officials are more involved in immigration enforcement
As Dr. Nik Theodore, a University of Illinois-Chicago professor and the author of the study
said: The decision to enlist police in immigration enforcement has driven a
wedge between police and Latino communities. The increased involvement of
police in immigration enforcement has significantly heightened the fears many
Latinos have of the police, leading to a mistrust of law enforcement authorities
and a reduction in public safety.

NAUDL 2015-16
Data linking Immigration to Crime Misleading

(__)
(__) Statistics surrounding immigration and crime are misleading because they
label those who have gone to jail for an immigration violation as criminals.
Immigration Policy Center 2013
[From Anecdotes to Evidence: Setting the Record Straight on Immigrants and Crime,
http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/just-facts/anecdotes-evidence-setting-record-straightimmigrants-and-crime-0]
Immigration Violations, Not Violent Acts, Account for Most Immigrants in
Federal Prison In an attempt to get around low immigrant incarceration rates, many
anti-immigrant activists turn to a frequently cited estimate that over one quarter of
inmates in federal prisons are criminal aliens. This is highly misleading for two reasons:
Many of the immigrants in federal prison are being criminally charged with an
immigration violation and nothing more. In other words, they may be in federal
prison even though they have not committed a violent crime or even a
property crime. Their only crime might be entering the country without permission.
The federal government has chosen to prosecute more and more unauthorized
immigrants for unlawful entry rather than simply deporting them, which
means that they end up in federal prison. The federal prison population is a small share
of the total prison population. One cannot make generalizations about the
incarceration rates of immigrants based on the immigrant share of the federal
inmate population since, according to data from the Bureau of Justice
Statistics, only about 9 percent of the U.S. prison population was in federal
prisons as of 2011. At the state and local level, where most U.S. prisoners are
held, the incarceration rates for immigrants are lower than for the native-born.

NAUDL 2015-16
Immigration Enforcement does not prevent terrorism

(__)
(__) Enforcing harsh restrictions on individuals who want to immigrate to the

United States does nothing to prevent terrorism.
Griswold, assistant director of trade policy studies at the Cato Institute,
2001[Danie Griswald, Dont Blame Immigrants for Terrorism,
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/dont-blame-immigrants-terrorism]
Long-time skeptics of immigration, including Pat Buchanan and the Federation for
American Immigration Reform, have tried in recent days to turn those legitimate
concerns about security into a general argument against openness to immigration. But
immigration and border control are two distinct issues. Border control is about
who we allow to enter the country, whether on a temporary or permanent basis;
immigration is about whom we allow to stay and settle permanently.
Immigrants are only a small subset of the total number of foreigners who enter
the United States every year. According to the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization
Service, 351 million aliens were admitted through INS ports of entry in fiscal year 2000
nearly a million entries a day. That total includes individuals who make multiple entries,
for example, tourists and business travelers with temporary visas, and aliens who hold
border-crossing cards that allow them to commute back and forth each week from
Canada and Mexico. The majority of aliens who enter the United States return to their
homeland after a few days, weeks, or months. Reducing the number of people we
allow to reside permanently in the United States would do nothing to protect
us from terrorists who do not come here to settle but to plot and commit
violent acts. And closing our borders to those who come here temporarily
would cause a huge economic disruption by denying entry to millions of people
who come to the United States each year for lawful, peaceful (and temporary)
purposes. It would be a national shame if, in the name of security, we were to close the
door to immigrants who come here to work and build a better life for themselves and
their families. Like the Statue of Liberty, the World Trade Center towers stood as
monuments to Americas openness to immigration. Workers from more than 80 different
nations lost their lives in the terrorist attacks. According to the Washington Post, The
hardest hit among foreign countries appears to be Britain, which is estimating about 300
deaths Chile has reported about 250 people missing, Colombia nearly 200, Turkey
about 130, the Philippines about 115, Israel about 113, and Canada between 45 and 70.
Germany has reported 170 people unaccounted for, but expects casualties to be around
100. Those people were not the cause of terrorism but its victims. The problem is not

NAUDL 2015-16
that we are letting too many people into the United States but that the
government is not keeping out the wrong people.

NAUDL 2015-16
Immigration funding trades off with terrorism prevention

(__)
(__) The money wasted on enforcing immigration laws trades off with money to
combat terrorism.
Open Borders, pro-immigration advocacy group, 2015 [Terrorism,
http://openborders.info/terrorism/]
The absence of legal migration channels is responsible for large scale illegal
immigration, which diverts law enforcement resources to combating it: This
includes large scale illegal immigration along the southern US-Mexico border.
By allowing more legal migration flows, security agencies could focus on
genuine terrorist threats rather than trying to keep out peaceful workers. Note
that despite the large scale illegal immigration, there have been almost no
instances of terrorists smuggling themselves across the southern border of
the United States. All terrorist attacks in the US carried out by foreigners have
been carried out by legal immigrants, tourists, or people on non-immigrant
visas, including some who overstayed their visas.

NAUDL 2015-16
Immigration Enforcement does not prevent terrorismextensions

(__)
(__) There is no link between immigrants and terrorism; immigrants are less
likely to commit violent crimes than the general population.
Rumbaut et al, Migration Policy Institute, 2006 [Rubn G. Rumbaut, Roberto G.
Gonzales, Golnaz Komaie, and Charlie V. Morgan, Debunking the Myth of Immigrant
Criminality: Imprisonment Among First- and Second-Generation Young Men,
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/debunking-myth-immigrant-criminalityimprisonment-among-first-and-second-generation-young]
This association flourishes in a post-9/11 climate of fear and ignorance where
"terrorism" and "losing control of our borders" are often mentioned in the
same breath, if without any evidence to back them up. But correlation is not
causation. In fact, immigrants have the lowest rates of imprisonment for
criminal convictions in American society. Both the national and local-level findings
presented here turn conventional wisdom on its head and present a challenge to
criminological theory as well as to sociological perspectives on "straight-line
assimilation." For every ethnic group without exception, the census data show an
increase in rates of criminal incarceration among young men from the foreign-born to the
U.S.-born generations, and over time in the United States among the foreign born
exactly the opposite of what is typically assumed both by standard theories and by
public opinion on immigration and crime. Paradoxically, incarceration rates are
lowest among immigrant young men, even among the least educated and the
least acculturated among them, but they increase sharply among the U.S. born and
acculturated second generation, especially among the least educated evidence of
downward assimilation that parallels patterns observed for marginalized native
minorities.

NAUDL 2015-16

(__)
(__) There is no link between terrorism and the crossing of the U.S border.
Stewart, special agent with the U.S. State Department for 10 years, 2014
[Scott, supervises Stratfor's analysis of terrorism and security issues, Examining the
Terrorist Threat from America's Southern Border,
https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/examining-terrorist-threat-americas-southern-border]
However, an examination of all jihadist plots since the first such attack in the
United States the November 1990 assassination of the radical founder of the Jewish
Defense League, Meir Kahane shows that none had any U.S.-Mexico border link.
Indeed, as we've noted elsewhere, there have been more plots against the U.S.
homeland that have involved the U.S.-Canada border, including the 1997 plot
to bomb the New York Subway and the Millennium Bomb Plot. But by and large,
most terrorists, including those behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the
9/11 attacks, have entered the United States by flying directly to the country.
There is not one jihadist attack or thwarted plot in which Mexican criminal organizations
smuggled the operative into the United States. There was one bumbling plot by Iran's
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in which Manssor Arbabsiar, a U.S. citizen born in Iran
and residing in Texas, traveled to Mexico in an attempt to contract a team of Mexican
cartel hit men to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States. Instead of Los
Zetas, he encountered a U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration informant and was set up
for a sting. There is no evidence that an actual Mexican cartel leader would have
accepted the money Arbabsiar offered for the assassination.
Mexican criminal leaders have witnessed U.S. government operations against
al Qaeda and the pressure that the U.S. government can put on an
organization that has been involved in an attack on the U.S. homeland.
Mexican organized crime bosses are businessmen, and even if they were morally
willing to work with terrorists a questionable assumption working with a terrorist
group would be bad for business. It is quite doubtful that Mexican crime bosses
would risk their multibillion-dollar smuggling empires for a one-time payment
from a terrorist group. It is also doubtful that an ideologically driven militant
group like a jihadist organization would trust a Mexican criminal organization
with its weapons and personnel.

NAUDL 2015-16

NAUDL 2015-16

(__)
(__) The individuals who committed 9/11 entered the country legally;
deporting undocumented immigrants would do nothing to prevent a
terrorist attack.
Tutasig, Committee on U.S. Latin American Relation, 2014
[Albaro, IMMIGRATION: A NATIONAL SECUIRTY THREAT?,
http://cuslar.org/2014/09/08/immigration-a-national-secuirty-threat/]
Others claim that the connection between immigration and terrorism is a
constructed and perceived threat rather than a real, objective danger. John Mueller,
author of Is There Still a Terrorist Threat?: The Myth of the Omnipresent Enemy, argues
that the absence of terrorist attacks in the United States is not a result of
increased border control and stricter immigration policies, and that the threat
of immigrants as terrorists has been exaggerated. Daniel Griswold of the Cato
Institute argues that terrorist attacks by foreigners are not a result of liberal
immigration policies, but are a result of failure to keep out the small number
of foreigners who do pose a threat. In his analysis Linking Immigrants and Terrorists:
The Use of Immigration as an Anti-Terror Policy, Alexander Spencer argues that there
is rarely a clear distinction between an immigrant and a foreigner, noting
that those responsible for the September 11 attacks were not immigrants, but
rather people who entered the United States with temporary visas. Julia
Tallmeister, author of Is Immigration a Threat to Security?, points out that
politicians and the media have managed to stir up hostility towards
immigrants, legal and undocumented, and therefore create a connection
between immigration and terrorismjust as it has been done with portraying
immigrants as a threat to societal and economic security.

NAUDL 2015-16

NAUDL 2015-16
Terrorism Disadvantage: Impact Answers

(__)
(__) There is no link between terrorism and the crossing of the U.S
border.
Stewart, special agent with the U.S. State Department for 10 years,
2014
[Scott, supervises Stratfor's analysis of terrorism and security issues, Examining the
Terrorist Threat from America's Southern Border,
https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/examining-terrorist-threat-americas-southern-border]
However, an examination of all jihadist plots since the first such attack in the
United States the November 1990 assassination of the radical founder of the Jewish
Defense League, Meir Kahane shows that none had any U.S.-Mexico border link.
Indeed, as we've noted elsewhere, there have been more plots against the U.S.
homeland that have involved the U.S.-Canada border, including the 1997 plot
to bomb the New York Subway and the Millennium Bomb Plot. But by and large,
most terrorists, including those behind the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the
9/11 attacks, have entered the United States by flying directly to the country.
There is not one jihadist attack or thwarted plot in which Mexican criminal organizations
smuggled the operative into the United States. There was one bumbling plot by Iran's
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in which Manssor Arbabsiar, a U.S. citizen born in Iran
and residing in Texas, traveled to Mexico in an attempt to contract a team of Mexican
cartel hit men to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States. Instead of Los
Zetas, he encountered a U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration informant and was set up
for a sting. There is no evidence that an actual Mexican cartel leader would have
accepted the money Arbabsiar offered for the assassination.
Mexican criminal leaders have witnessed U.S. government operations against
al Qaeda and the pressure that the U.S. government can put on an
organization that has been involved in an attack on the U.S. homeland.
Mexican organized crime bosses are businessmen, and even if they were morally
willing to work with terrorists a questionable assumption working with a terrorist
group would be bad for business. It is quite doubtful that Mexican crime bosses
would risk their multibillion-dollar smuggling empires for a one-time payment
from a terrorist group. It is also doubtful that an ideologically driven militant
group like a jihadist organization would trust a Mexican criminal organization
with its weapons and personnel.

NAUDL 2015-16

NAUDL 2015-16
DREAM Act does not solve immigration issues

(__) The DREAM Act fails because it ties citizenship to higher education when
many immigrants cannot afford to go to college
Doyle, Elon University, 2013 [Jack Doyle, The Dream Act: A Flawed Patch for the
Cracked and Pothole-Filled Road to Citizenship, http://www.elon.edu/eweb/academics/writing_ excellence/contest/Contest%20Entry%20Doyle%20Research
%20Essay.xhtml]
The DREAM Act favors the children of those who came to the United States for
educational purposes by making education a requirement for citizenship a
requirement most likely to be met by those with higher GPAs and a greater motivation to
pursue education. It provides no means by which employment or skill can gain
an immigrant child citizenship. This bias leads to certain children having an easier
path to citizenship than others, which might lead to some children not gaining citizenship
and remaining illegal. As a result, the U.S. would lose valuable potential citizens and
have to support more illegal immigrants than if the DREAM Act had no bias. If the United
States wants to grant citizenship to those who are most willing to work hard, become
skilled laborers, and be economic assets to the country, it needs to provide options for
children of motivated immigrants who might focus on something other than education.
While the DREAM Act provides motivation for immigrant children to get an education, it
does nothing to remove the barriers preventing them from doing so or to
alleviate the financial burden that immigrant children pose to the education
system. A report by the Foundation of Child Development shows that 45% of
undocumented immigrants fail to reach the status of a high school graduate,
and only 19% ever acquire a college degree (Capps 2004). This data can make one
think that illegal immigrants just do not put the same effort into schooling that
Americans do, because many venues exist through which all people in the U.S. can get
an education.

NAUDL 2015-16
DREAM Act does not solve immigration issues - extensions

(___)
(__) The DREAM Act still provides no financial support and does not grant
residency meaning that undocumented youth are still at risk of deportation.
Democracy Now! 2010 [Debate: Is DREAM Act a Solution for Millions of Undocumented
Youth or a Funnel for Military Recruitment?
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/8/20/debate_is_ dream_act_a_solution]
The DREAM Act also does not allow undocumented youth, who have applied to
the DREAM Act and who qualify for the DREAM Act, to get Pell Grants or to get
any kind of federal-based scholarships only loans and work study, which is
not sufficient to cover tuition. The military has the Montgomery GI Bill. The military,
through the National Guard and the Reserves, has tuition waivers. The DREAM Act
does not include anything along the lines of financial stability, anything along
the lines of healthcare, anything along the lines of housing, whereas the military
has all of these things that its in a position to offer to the vast majority of these 65,000
students who graduate every year, to say, "Come over here. We will teach you English.
We will give you housing. Well give you a steady paycheck. Well give you all these
things, if you serve in the military." The two-year option to serve in the military is also
not a two-year option, because any military contract is eight years. No less than eight
years. Whether it be a combination of two years of active service and eight years in the
Reserves or four each or three and five, it doesnt matter. Its always eight years. And
people are always subject to stop-loss. On top of that, the DREAM Act does not
grant residency. It grants conditional, temporary residency, which means that
at any given point between the time that the person applies for the DREAM
Act, theres a period of six years when this person is not even eligible to apply
for permanent residency and is subjected to be deported just like any other
undocumented immigrant here.

NAUDL 2015-16
DREAM Act does not solve immigration issues - extensions

(___)
(__) Very few students qualify for the DREAM Act

Batara Immigration Law 2015 [The DREAM Act Reality: Not All Immigrant Students
Qualify, http://www.bataraimmigrationlaw.com/riverside-san-bernardino-dream-act.html]
The DREAM Act Reality: Not All Immigrant Students Qualify Most of the public
discussion on the DREAM Act has focused on students who are at the top of their classes.
At local schools like California State University, San Bernardino, University of California
at Riverside, and California State University, San Diego the DREAM Act has received
strong support from students, faculty, and administrators. But there is another, quite
disappointing side to the DREAM Act. Many immigrant students will not be able to
meet the strict DREAM Act requirements. A recent study conducted by the
Migration Policy Institute, an independent, nonpartisan, non-profit think tank
dedicated to the study of the movement of people worldwide, noted that only
38% of the immigrant children, who might technically qualify for the DREAM
Act, will attain legal immigration status. Contrary to the arguments of immigration
opponents, this study demonstrates that the DREAM Act is not a rubber stamp amnesty.
Although changes are still likely, here is the currently proposed process for the DREAM
Act: First Step: Immigrant children must show that they entered the United
States before they were 16 years old lived here for five years before the date
when the DREAM Act becomes law -and on the date when the DREAM Act
becomes law graduated from a high school or earned a GED diploma, or have
been accepted into an institution of higher education (i.e., college) must be between the
ages of 12 and 35 at the time of application have not committed any crimes and possess
good moral character. Applicants will also need to pay a hefty penalty fee and
demonstrate fluency in English. If they can fulfill these requirements, they will be
granted conditional permanent residence for six years.

NAUDL 2015-16
DREAM Act harms immigrants- Military Recruitment (1/2)

1. The DREAM Act will be used to exploit poor immigrant youth into
joining the military
Gonzalez, PhD student in Cultural Foundations of Education at Syracuse
University, 2014 [Martin Alberto, Good for who?: An examination of the DREAM Act
using an interest convergence lens,
https://mrperez.expressions.syr.edu/immigration/gallery/the-school/gonzalez/]
Despite some support by both conservatives and liberals in favor of the DREAM Act via
incentivizing the military, there are various concerns that arise due to such an
emphasis placed on joining the military as a benefit of the DREAM Act. For
instance, in an interview regarding the growth in military recruitment of Asian Americans
and other people of color, immigration scholar Tracy Buenavista stated, The uptick has
really been a result of these racialized recruitment strategies, where theyre coming
up with programs that make it more desirable for certain communities to enlist
(Lanz and Vigeland, 2010). That is, with very little alternatives and options, Asian
Americans and people of color along with undocumented immigrants will join the
military even though it may not be the best move for them (Mariscal, 2004).
Further, because undocumented immigrants will be targeted heavily in terms of
enlisting in the military, they will practically be coerced into joining if they plan on
putting themselves in a better position for naturalization and to reap the benefits
of the DREAM Act. Furthermore, this desire to increase military recruitment can
easily result in the exploitation of undocumented immigrants without fulfilling
any promises. Buenavista and Gonzales (2011) posit that history has demonstrated
that the US has compelled particular undocumented groups of immigrants,
specifically Filipinos during World War II, into joining the military without
fulfilling its promises of inclusion into the political, social, and economic
realms of the US to a majority of those Filipinos who went to war and paid their dues,
so to speak.

NAUDL 2015-16
DREAM Act harms immigrants- Military Recruitment (2/2)

2. Coercing young immigrants into the military is bad because it leads
to people of color being overrepresented in terms of military recruitment
and fatalities.
Gonzalez, PhD student in Cultural Foundations of Education at Syracuse
University, 2014 [Martin Alberto, Good for who?: An examination of the DREAM Act
using an interest convergence lens,
https://mrperez.expressions.syr.edu/immigration/gallery/the-school/gonzalez/]
Unfortunately, the more undocumented immigrants are recruited into the
military, the more likely it is for undocumented immigrants to lose their lives
while in search of their US citizenship. Even though undocumented immigrants
only make up about 3 percent of all military personnel on active duty, they
account for a disproportionate amount of casualties, at 8 percent (Buenavista,
2012). In addition, scholars (Kiang, 1991; Mariscal 2007, 2004; Ruef et al., 2000) have
found that not only were soldiers of color more likely to be sent to combat, but
they also suffer from serious and detrimental combat-related disorders such as
posttraumatic stress disorder at higher rates than their white counterparts. As
history has shown, enlisting and serving in the military will not guarantee
anything for undocumented immigrants; therefore, Buenavista and Gonzales (2011)
recommended that there should be a removal of the military provisions in the DREAM
Act to reduce the vulnerability of undocumented immigrants to military service and
premature death (p. 35). Thus, the benefits that the US will reap if the military provision
in the DREAM Act is left as is will outweigh the benefits (along with pressure, stress, and
likelihood of death) of undocumented immigrants.

NAUDL 2015-16

NAUDL 2015-16
DREAM Act does not prevent deportation

(__) The DREAM Act does not protect immigrant families from deportation.
Tabo, heads the Center for Legal Pedagogy at Texas Southern University, 2013
[Tamara Tabo, The Impossible DREAM (Act): Why This Immigration Question Is Just A
Distraction, http://abovethelaw.com/2013/07/the-impossible-dream-act-why-thisimmigration-question-is-just-a-distraction/]
Many immigration activists want family members of DREAMers to gain legal
status too. In a recent piece for Politico, Cesar Vargas, director of DREAM Action
Coalition and a national activist for the DREAM Act, writes: The KIDS Act represents a
step backwards for Republicans. Even the bills very name is an insult: We DREAMers are
no longer kids. We have grown as young adults in the country we call home. I am 29
years old, graduated law school and passed the bar exam. I have done everything that
American society required of me. And one day, I hope to serve my country in the Armed
Forces. Fair enough. Vargas hardly sounds like the drug mule Rep. King fears. Again, lots
of us can endorse not deporting young adults who did not choose to enter the U.S.
illegally as minors and now participate admirably in American society. (Discuss amongst
yourselves whether going to law school counts as evidence for or against. See also here.)
Vargas continues: While the details of [the proposed KIDS Act] are not yet public, what is
certain is that the proposal, crafted by Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Judiciary
Chairman Bob Goodlatte, does not unite families. The proposal prioritizes DREAMers
for citizenship but leaves our parents without the same opportunity, leaving
them in the shadows at a time of record deportations. See, theres the rub.
Many activists refuse to support the DREAM Act unless it allows families to
stay in the country too. Note that Vargas, for example, is 29. We are not here
debating the deportation of custodial parents of minors while permitting the kids to
legally remain. In short, its not that sort of breakup of families. If you favor a path to
citizenship (or amnesty, if you like) for all but a few immigrants currently in the country
illegally, then a family provision in the KIDS Act looks good. But if you want bipartisan
support, you wont win much by demanding a family provision. Those who oppose
sweeping immigration reform are unlikely to be persuaded that people who chose to
enter the U.S. illegally i.e., the parents of DREAMers should be permitted to
remain without penalty, even if their kids deserve that chance. Unless you already want
a path to citizenship for all, whats so compelling about a 30-year-old living without his
parents nearby? When else do we let the innocence and good behavior of adult children
cancel out the knowing criminal conduct of their parents? Even if the central idea
behind the DREAM Act and the KIDS Act appeals to a large base, the family
issue divides too deeply for either side to emerge from the debate satisfied.
Immigration reformers wont take less; anti-illegal-immigration stalwarts wont give
more. If we apply these rules to future children brought to the U.S. illegally, parents are

NAUDL 2015-16
likely to place their children at risk by bringing them across a treacherous U.S.-Mexico
border, a border that will remain dangerous so long as immigration is limited as it now is.
What looks at first like legislation most of us can agree on turns out to be something that
we should all agree is a half-hearted distraction from the bigger immigration debate.
Why not focus our efforts on the more fundamental debate instead of getting caught up
in the details of this one?

NAUDL 2015-16
DREAM Act does not prevent surveillance

(__)
(__) DREAM Act fails because immigration surveillance can happen as early as
childhood
Pabst, reporter at Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 2008 [Georgia Pabst, Agents
accused of using Head Start to track immigrants,
http://www.chron.com/news/article/Agents-accused-of-using-Head-Start-to-track1772721.php]
Immigration enforcement officials are now targeting migrant and seasonal

Head Start centers in some states as part of efforts to track down illegal
immigrants, the executive director of the National Migrant and Seasonal Head
Start Association says. Yvette Sanchez, president of the Washington, D.C.-based
association, was in Milwaukee recently for a meeting of the national board of directors at
United Migrant Opportunity Services Inc. She said immigration surveillance is
emerging as one of the top three issues for the group, comprising migrant and
seasonal Head Start directors, staff, parents and friends. Financial appropriations
and the need for more bilingual materials are the others, she said. "Several kids and
babies died in the fields because parents were fearful of sending them to Head
Start," she said in an interview. "Since early 2007, many of our programs started
to notice that Border Patrol of Immigration and Customs Enforcement vehicles
were parked outside their centers, and some were following buses picking up
children," she said. Jason Ciliberti, supervisory Border Patrol agent in Washington, D.C.,
said it's not the agency's policy to stake out Head Start centers. "It could have happened
if we believe there was an immigration violation afoot, but it's not our policy or practice, I
believe." Gail Montenegro, a spokeswoman with ICE in Chicago, said: "Generally, our
operations avoid actions at school settings. ... However, we will take into custody during
these targeted operations anyone encountered who may be in the country illegally." In
testimony before the congressional subcommittee on work force protections in May, ICE
officials were provided with a list of dates and places regarding ICE activities near
migrant and seasonal Head Start programs in Florida, Tennessee, Georgia and New
Mexico, according to a letter sent to ICE officials in Washington by the Congressional
Hispanic Caucus. "We ask that ICE enforcement and intimidation tactics near migrant
and seasonal Head Start centers cease immediately," U.S. Reps. Joe Baca, D-Calif., Luis
Gutierrez, D-Ill., and Ruben Hinojosa, D-Mercedes, wrote. "Parents were fearful of
going to the centers or letting their kids get on the bus, and enrollment went
down in some parts," Sanchez said. In Tennessee, one family took their baby
with them to the fields and left the baby in the truck where the baby died, she

NAUDL 2015-16
said. Not a requirement The criteria for participating in migrant and seasonal
Head Start programs is low family income and agricultural employment, she
said. "Since the Head Start program was started in 1965, we have never asked
families if they are citizens, and it's never been a requirement," she said.
Migrant and seasonal Head Start programs operate in 39 states and serve
more than 30,000 migrants and 3,000 children of seasonal farm workers, she
said. Migrant and seasonal Head Start programs serve children from 6 months
to school age and also provide a variety of health and transportation services.

Immigration Surveillance Policy Aff

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Immigration Surveillance Policy Aff

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

The U.S Economy Advantage Summary

The Human Rights Advantage Summary

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

Federal expenditures: spending by the federal government.

Alterity: the state of being other or different; otherness.

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

Contention One: Inherency

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

The current state of immigration policy in the United

border and immigration control have grown

and now substantially exceed expenditures

staggering, widely noted

the underlying nature of

the implementation of transformative

other areas of contemporary governance, immigration control

Deportation of people without a criminal record is still increasing despite

438,421 unauthorized immigrants in

, continuing a streak of stepped

the deporter in chief over the fact that his administration

as many immigrants in five

own, something he said he will do after the November midterm elections.

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

Contention Two: Economy

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

If the federal government continues deporting people the

are responsible for much of American population growth.

and their descendants

$1.9 trillion in wealth

that people want to buy. In turn, they spend much of it here.

B. Deportation is expensive and cost billions of dollars over time.

over five years

for every man, woman, and child in this country. If

public and private school

what the federal government spent to maintain the

from prekindergarten to the 12th grade

Put another way,

policy -- which he described as "not a realistic policy option" --

He added: "This amounts to a cumulative

C. Undocumented immigrants help the economy grow by purchasing

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

, who are overwhelmingly American

that forced businesses and the police

in construction and agriculture

. In the six years after April 2006,

for the 20 largest metropolitan areas in the nation

area, the price index

D. Times of high unemployment and slow growth hurt families and

event, especially for older workers. A paper by the

Daniel Sullivan and Till von Wachter

for older male workers

keeps his job.

The duration of unemployment is

, although the causal links are

are significant enough to

Kerwin Charles and Melvin Stephens recently

Immigration Surveillance Affirmative

Scenario 1 Economic Collapse

economic decline may increase the likelihood of external conflict