Nolan writes in his latest article:
“The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 established a legalization program for undocumented aliens already in the United States and created employer sanctions to discourage employers from hiring undocumented aliens in the future.
That was 30 years ago, and the program still has not been fully implemented. It might be better to let the Department of Labor (DOL) deal with the job magnet.
Many American employers hire undocumented foreign workers because it is easy to exploit them. DOL enforces federal labor laws that were enacted to curb such abuses, such as the Fair Labor Standards Act which established a minimum wage, overtime pay, and other employment standards.
With additional funding, DOL could mount a large-scale, nationwide campaign to stop the exploitation of employees in industries known to hire large numbers of undocumented aliens, without basing the fines on the immigration status of the employees.
In contrast with Trump, President Obama focused his immigration enforcement program on aliens who had been convicted of serious crimes, had been caught near the border after an illegal entry, or had returned unlawfully after being deported.
Once an undocumented alien had succeeded in reaching the interior of the country, he was “home free.” It was extremely unlikely that he would be deported unless he was convicted of a serious crime. This was a powerful incentive to find a way to get past security measures on the border.
No deportable alien is safe from deportation under Trump’s enforcement policies.
This produced results very quickly. In April 2017, CBP reported a sharp decline in the number of aliens apprehended while making illegal crossings.
But Trump has to implement his enforcement policies to keep the magnet from coming back and he could benefit from implementing expedited removal proceedings.
As of the June 2017, the immigrant court’s backlog was 610,524 cases. This severely limited efforts to remove deportable aliens.
President Trump finessed his way around this problem by expanding the use of expedited removal proceedings in his Executive Order, Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements.
In expedited removal proceedings, which are conducted by immigration officers, an alien who lacks proper documentation or has committed fraud or a willful misrepresentation to enter the country, and has not been physically present for two years, can be deported without a hearing before an immigration judge, unless he establishes a credible fear of persecution.
Trump needs funding to be able to carry out a large-scale, nationwide program of expedited removal proceedings.
These measures would reduce the number of people trying to make illegal crossings, making border security much easier to achieve, even without his promised wall.”
******************************
Go on over to The Hill to read Nolan’s complete analysis.
I agree with Nolan and many in Congress that the border wall will be an ineffective waste of money. And, in the liteny of Trump lies, it has become clear that “Mexico will pay” is just another whopper.
I also agree with Nolan that more funding for Fair Labor Standards Act enforcement is a good idea. However, the Trump Administration is moving the other way on all regulatory enforcement except immigration.
I would oppose funding for expedited removal. I believe it is a clear denial of due process, particularly as carried out by this Administration. I recognize that to date most Federal Courts have taken a “head in the sand” approach to the serious constitutional issues raised by expedited removal. But, I think that as Trump pushes the envelope the courts will eventually have to face up to the total lack of due process and safeguards in the current system.
In any event, whether expedited removal is unconstitutional or not, it’s bad policy. It should be rescinded, not expanded.
PWS
08-26-17
As usual, Nolan’s viewpoint assumes without explanation that it’s in the American interest to remove millions of new immigrant workers when our median age in the USA is 56 years old. Why? Like the parent who lacks rational explanations who shouts: Because I said so!
Reminds me of the old joke about the cement wall inside heaven so we Catholics can think we are the only ones there!
As long as the USA wants spend billions to pour tons of cement and other infrastructure along our Southern border, how about building something to protect the low lying Gulf area, like Holland did since 70% of their land is below sea level? Better than preventing immigrants.
We could even use such flood protection infrastructure to channel fresh water West when needed. There will be plenty of displaced construction workers in the near future in Southeast Texas.