Mazmanyan 1

Nelly Mazmanyan

Professor Powell

English 101 Honors

2 December 2019

Immigration: America’s Broken System

“I could see the anguish and suffering on her face, the pain of the family,” Sean Carroll,

S.J., the director of the Kino Border Initiative, said. “It’s through contact with people like

Guadalupe García de Rayos that we’ve seen, time and time again, the harmful effects of

deportation” (Long-Garcia). Guadalupe García de Rayos is one of the millions who come face to

face with the United States’ immigration system, risking deportation in the hopes of achieving

their highest aspirations for their families. Ultimately, the policies enacted by the Trump

administration have made it increasingly difficult for people to immigrate legally, resulting in an

increase of undocumented immigrants. The United States should substantially reduce its

restrictions on immigration as the current policies are extreme and ineffective.

One contributing factor to the rise of undocumented immigrants in the United States is

the Trump administration’s limitations of refugee admissions. Many seek to immigrate to the

U.S. to flee from religious persecution, raging wars, or natural disasters. The American ideology

leads many to seek asylum and the freedom that their native country lacks. The Trump

administration fails to live up to the American ideology as admission capacities are so limited

that ​only 22,491 refugees were admitted in fiscal 2018​ compared to the 84,995 in 2016

(​Krogstad​). ​Despite growing dangers within foreign countries pressuring many to escape, the

number of admitted refugees continues to decrease.​ Within President Trump's first year in office,
 Mazmanyan 2

“refugee admissions fell about 70 percent” in spite of the ​moral and ethical dilemmas (“National

Topic Debate”). ​To put this decline into perspective, the Trump administration’s new capacity of

30,000 refugees in 2019 is “at the lowest ​since Congress created the modern refugee program in

1980” (Krogstad). This historically low capacity ensures that those in need of safety will likely

not have the opportunity to immigrate legally into the United States. Furthermore, the admissions

capacity inherently increases the number of illegal immigrants. The environmental stressors that

drive immigrants to seek refugee status are often severe as the process to apply is extremely

difficult and confusing. As a result, many are forced to immigrate illegally rather than try to

navigate the important bureaucratic process.

Admittedly, the events following 9/11 have left citizens concerned for national security,

resulting in many supporting the refugee admissions limitations. The Trump administration cited

these immigration capacities as a safety measure as refugees from Middle Eastern countries are

deemed high-risk potential security concerns. What this argument does not take into account is

that following 9/11, “the U.S. has resettled nearly 800,000 refugees through the resettlement

program and ​none​ have launched a terrorist attack on US soil” (“President Trump’s Executive”).

By alienating Muslim groups from legally immigrating, it only fuels Islamophobia and prejudice

giving the impression that all Muslims are a danger to society. This policy gives terrorist groups

a propaganda tool “​to claim these measures prove that the United States is hostile to Islam”

(“President Trump’s Executive”). Having open border policies will pave the path towards

citizenship for refugees and fight against terrorist recruitment. To continue to be globally known

and celebrated for its diversity, America must revise these policies to be more lenient and give

all the equal opportunity to legally immigrate.

 Mazmanyan 3

Furthermore, another extreme measure of the Trump administration policies is the United

States’ reduction of vital programs that are essential to the legal immigration process.

Eliminating these resources takes away people’s opportunity to legally reside in America.

Programs, such as family-based green cards and H-1B, have become substantially limited in

availability, leaving many without the means to lawfully immigrate. Family-based immigration

alone accounts for “​about two-thirds of the more than 1 million people who receive [visas]

annually” (Krogstad). Under the Trump administration, the number of family-sponsored

immigrants could decline to about one-third, greatly impacting the most common way in which

people receive visas (Krogstad). The program originally gave individuals a green card if they had

extended family already residing in America; however, it now only extends to immediate family.

The chances of one winning the green card lottery were already low and the new additional

requirements only make the process more difficult. In like manner, ​the Trump administration has

greatly reduced the number of H-1B visas, the nation’s biggest temporary employment program,

with the denial rate increasing even more in 2019 (​Krogstad​). In 2017, the H-1B visa program

“​accounted for about a quarter (23%) of all temporary visas” issued, therefore the lowered

acceptance rates could leave many without a source to immigrate lawfully (Krogstad). Lowering

the rate of accepted visas not only makes it more difficult to immigrate legally but encourages

illegal entry as many become desperate for work. Because the program allowed individuals the

opportunity to find work and contribute to the American economy, the reductions harm both

parties. These implications demonstrates the extremity of the new policy restricting visas. In

addition to reducing the number of visas, employers are now required to request additional

information of applicants before granting visas. These inquiries include education and work
 Mazmanyan 4

history documents that simply elongate the entire immigration process. Most seeking to work

under this program do not satisfy the educational requirements, having worked from a young age

to support their families. According to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services,

“the number of such ‘requests for evidence’ from January to August 2017 jumped 44 percent

compared with the same period last year” (Jordan). Increasing requirements and the time

pressures for those who are desperate for alternatives contribute to the rise of undocumented

immigrants.

Some may argue that immigrants drain the economy by taking employment opportunities

from citizens, and they therefore, support the reduction of H-1B visas. Many are rightfully afraid

of losing job opportunities given the universal concern of unemployment. While this view seems

plausible at the surface, in fact, temporary immigrant workers help strengthen the American

economy. In fact, “estimates suggest that every 100 new H-1B workers, or temporary

high-skilled immigrants, result in an additional 183 jobs for U.S. natives,” (“National Debate

Topic”). In other words, the visa not only creates job opportunities for undocumented

immigrants but also for American citizens. When used effectively, these programs can help

support the economy as well as encourage legal immigration.

Another extremity employed to reduce the number of undocumented immigrants is the

increased construction of detainment facilities. These detainment facilities are, however,

immoral in the treatment of detainees and ineffective in their efforts to lower illegal immigration

rates. The centers were established to hold undocumented immigrants subject to deportation as

well as illegal border-crossers until authorities reach a final verdict in their cases. President

Trump’s Executive Order 13768 on border security authorized the establishment of more
 Mazmanyan 5

detainment facilities, while the conditions of the centers were not improved. ​Allison Knox,

professor of emergency management at Eastern Kentucky University, analyzed the living

conditions of the highly impacted centers determining that they “are not well equipped to be able

to handle the influx of immigrants due to the policy changes.” The strict policy was enacted to

deter and ultimately terminate illegal immigration, but the harsh conditions of the centers have

become unethical. The reality of the impacted centers includes “poor sleeping conditions, no

showers (with individuals not bathing for 5 days) and unsanitary drinking water” due to the lack

of sufficient resources (Knox). The current policy’s extreme nature has harmed the mental and

physical health of the detainees whose stays often extend for long periods.

In addition to reducing legal immigration options, the Trump administration has unfairly

strengthened deportation policies. The Executive Order was written in such broad terms that

anyone “who committed even a minor offense, such as a traffic violation or jaywalking, could be

deported” (“President Trump’s Executive”). Those who have been living in the United States for

years, with U.S. citizen children and no prior criminal history, are thus subject to deportation.

These strict policies spread fear within immigrant communities, despite it being in place

allegedly to apprehend criminals. Regardless of the policy’s original intent, there have been

many occasions in which ICE agents would arrest and deport innocent undocumented

immigrants despite their claims. For instance, in an operation conducted by the Santa Cruz Police

Department and ICE, SCPD was told ​that “the operation would target dangerous gang members,

however, individuals with no gang affiliation were arrested in the raid and deported by ICE”

(Lasch et al.). These policies were set into place with hopes of decreasing crime rates, as there is

a common belief that undocumented immigrants bring crime with them when immigrating. This
 Mazmanyan 6

argument was the driving force behind Trump’s 2016 campaign to lower illegal immigration

rates. While this view seems plausible at first, creating stricter border security policies would

“​drive more migrants into the arms of migrant smugglers and human traffickers,” thus increasing

crime (Knox). As they are unable to legally immigrate, these people would remain vulnerable to

the possible dangers of their native country. In addition, a majority of undocumented immigrants

residing in the United States have developed “strong family and other ties in the U.S., and either

don’t have criminal records or have committed minor, nonviolent offenses” (Long-Garcia). The

risk of deportation often incentivizes the community to avoid fraudulent behavior. A study

conducted by the Kino Border Initiative and the Center for Migration Studies of NewYork

revealed that “nearly half of the participants reported they had not been convicted of any crime; a

third reported committing minor traffic violations,” before being deported (Long-Garcia). The

harsh consequences of the current policies exemplify the need for reform within the American

immigration system.

One possible solution to lower the number of undocumented immigrants in the United

States is to reform the broken asylum system. The process of obtaining asylum in America is a

lengthy procedure, taking years before one’s case is heard in court. It is ​mandated that one must

establish eligibility for asylum through a “credible fear” interview conducted by immigration

officials (Meissner and Pierce). Thereafter, these individuals are allowed entry into the United

States until the time of their case hearing. ​To illustrate the extent of this matter, the courts “​have

a rapidly increasing backlog of more than ​800,000 cases​,” resulting in an “average of two years

for a case to be heard” (Nunez-Neto). These backlogs “serve as an incentive for those without

protection needs to also seek asylum,” contributing to the influx of undocumented immigrants
 Mazmanyan 7

(Meissner and Pierce). In order to improve this bureaucratic process, the United States

government must allocate funds towards increasing the number of immigration judges qualified

to review asylum cases. Furthermore, there needs to be an expansion in the size of the asylum

officer corps who could contribute to making the final verdicts of one’s case. By implementing

these reforms, asylum seekers would receive their determinations in months rather than years.

There is fear among immigrant communities to attend their trials as many lack proper

representation, resulting in absences. In order to ensure appearance at asylum hearings, a

network of legal representation must be established given the “high rates of appearances [that]

pilot programs for such policies have demonstrated” (Meissner and Pierce). In other words,

having counsel will give all the opportunity to a fair trial, thus encouraging many to appear for

their immigration cases. By implementing these reforms to the United States’ immigration

system, there will be a decrease in the number of undocumented immigrants.

Finally, the United States should provide aid to Central American countries to foster

safer, economically stable countries to deter illegal immigration. The volatile political and

economic climate of these countries leaves its citizens in distress, turning towards migration.

Researchers of the Migration Policy Institute, Doris Meissner and Sarah Pierce, emphasize that

“political turmoil, gang violence, corruption, increased climate and agricultural challenges, and

weak economies in Central America will drive people to migrate” regardless if means to do so

are lawful. By helping improve the citizen security and stability of these countries, individuals

will be more likely to stay rather than find alternatives to immigrate to the United States. For

instance, implementing programs and panels to promote economic growth will greatly benefit

both the countries in Central America and the United States. According to data from the U.S.
 Mazmanyan 8

Customs and Border Protection, an agricultural program enacted by the United States Agency for

International Development (USAID) helped “to increase rural farmers’ sales by 51% and created

20,000 jobs in the Western Highlands region of Guatemala, an area especially prone to

migration” (“Central America”). This example of government intervention in Central America

not only improved Guatemala's economy with sales but also with employment. Creating jobs

provided these individuals with a stable income to support their families without needing to

immigrate illegally to the United States. Furthermore, joint c​ommunity policing and youth

programs in Honduras ​by the USAID and State Department​ “helped reduce homicide rates in

at-risk communities up to 73% between 2013 and 2016” (“Central America”). Many seek for

asylum and security primarily due to dangerous environments. Improving living conditions will

subsequently decrease the rate of undocumented immigrants residing in the United States.

Creating more programs to aid Central America to establish safe communities with economic

opportunities will reduce the number of factors driving individuals to immigrate illegally to the

United States unlawfully, thus improving the current system.

The United States’ strict immigration laws only worsen the issue of illegal immigration

due to its extremities. It is those like Guadalupe García de Rayos that deserve the opportunity to

lawfully immigrate to the United States with ease, instead of suffering from the consequences of

extreme restrictions. The United States​ is comprised of immigrants and should continue to

welcome and embrace all immigrants and refugees regardless of national origin. The current

immigration policies should be reformed to help create a safe, effective system to promote lawful

immigration into the United States.

 Mazmanyan 9

Works Cited

“Central America and U.S. Assistance.” ​U.S. Global Leadership Coalition,​ July 2019,

www.usglc.org/faq-violence-migration-and-u-s-assistance-to-central-america/.

Jordan, Miriam. "Under Trump, Wall of Red Tape Hinders Legal Immigration: National Desk."

New York Times​, Dec 21, 2017​. ProQuest,​ http://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2048/login?url=

https://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2457/docview/1979096512?accountid=38295.

Knox, Allison G. S. “Extended Commentary: Administrative Failures: The Immigration

Detention Centers and Abu Ghraib Prison.” ​International Social Science Review,​ vol. 95,

no. 2, May 2019, pp. 1–15. ​EBSCOhost​, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true

&db=a9h&AN=138419625&site=ehost-live.

Krogstad, Jens Manuel, and Ana Gonzalez-Barrera. “Key Facts about U.S. Immigration Policies

and Proposed Changes.” ​Pew Research Center,​ 17 May 2019, www.pewresearch.org/

fact-tank/2019/05/17/key-facts-about-u-s-immigration-policies-and-proposed-changes/.

Lasch, Christopher N., et al. “Understanding ‘Sanctuary Cities.’” ​Boston College Law Review​,

vol. 59, no. 5, May 2018, pp. 1704–1774. ​EBSCOhost,​ search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=a9h&AN=133419050&site=ehost-live.

Long-García, J. D. “The Faithful Deported: Study Details Impact of Trump’s Immigration

Policies.” ​America,​ vol. 219, no. 13, Dec. 2018, pp. 16–17. ​EBSCOhost,​

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=133355100&site=ehost-live.

Meissner, Doris, and Sarah Pierce. “Policy Solutions to Address Crisis at Border Exist, But

Require Will and Staying Power to Execute.” ​Migration Policy Institute ,​ 1 April 2019,
 Mazmanyan 10

www.migrationpolicy.org/news/policy-solutions-address-crisis-border-exist-require-will-

staying-power.

"National Debate Topic 2018–19: Immigration: Resolved: The United States Federal

Government Should Substantially Reduce Its Restrictions on Legal Immigration to the

United States." ​Issues & Controversies,​ Infobase, 13 July 2018, https://icof.infobase

learning.com/recordurl.aspx?ID=17888. Accessed 28 Oct. 2019.

Nunez-Neto, Blas. “Common Sense Solutions to the Border Crisis.” ​RAND Corporation,​ 2 May

2019, www.rand.org/blog/2019/05/common-sense-solutions-to-the-border-crisis.html.

“President Trump's Executive Orders on Immigration and Refugees.” ​The Center for Migration

Studies of New York (CMS),​ 14 Feb. 2017, cmsny.org/trumps-executive-orders-

immigration-refugees/.