Unanswered [1] | Urgent [0]
  

Home / Writing Feedback   % width Posts: 4


Treatment of Illegal Immagrants - U.S. versus Mexico


Paula6 1 / 1  
Jun 7, 2010   #1
Immigration issues have become a popular topic in the media brought on by Arizona's new immigration bill, Senate Bill 1070. The Arizona bill is an attempt, by that State, to address the influx of illegal immigrants, mostly who are from the neighboring country of Mexico. This paper reviews the immigration detention laws and policies of the United States and Mexico and how the "human element" can be affected by those laws and policies. By reviewing and comparing the immigration detention policies of both the United States and Mexico it is evident that detention process is to punish the individual for entering the country without the proper documentation. A concern for a particular section of that population is individual's detained (mainly young women) who were brought to the Country for illegal purpose such as for prostitution under the control of others termed "human trafficking". Both Countries have exceptions for individual that were brought to the Country unwillingly, but even with the exceptions the individuals are caught in the immigration cycle. The Department of Homeland Security released a report in October 2009, "Although many immigrants have not committed crimes they're held in secure facilities designed for criminals and often in far more restrictive conditions than necessary. They also often don't have sufficient access to medical and legal assistance while in custody". The term illegal immigrant, alien, and migrants, are all used interchangeably throughout the materials reviewed for this paper. An illegal immigrant is a person who has entered the country without official authorization

The Executive branch uses immigration detainers to control the release of non-citizens from state and local jails, (Lash 2008). The United States immigration process is controlled by the federal government. There are five agencies involved in the immigration process: Department of Homeland Security, Department of Justice, Department of State, Department of Labor, and the Department of Health and Human Services. Homeland Security enforces the immigration laws. Immigration Detainers are issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), local law enforcement officials, and through ICE (Lash 2008). Obviously most individuals are detained after coming into the system with criminal charges.

Mexico's immigration laws are under the oversight of the National Institute of Immigration which is a department of the Secretary of Government and is regulated by the Law of Population. The Law of Nationality regulates Mexican Nationality, citizenship, and naturalization.

The Washington Defender Association Immigration Project (Spring 2010) outlines how detainer on illegal immigrants is handled in United States. In the article detainers are defined as the primary immigration enforcement tool that "ICE" uses to apprehend non citizens in the criminal justice system. The Article further states that, "The Board of Immigration Appeals has characterized a detainer as merely an administrative mechanism to assure that a person subject to confinement will not be released from custody until the party requesting the detainer has an opportunity to act". The report further claims that in many instances "ICE "issues the detainer prior to conducting any reliable investigation as to whether the person is in fact subject to deportation/removal. In the United States the immigration detainer is triggered when the jail's lawful authority to detain the individual expires: 1) The case is pending and the Court orders release, 2) The case is dismissed and the person is to be released, 3) A conviction is entered and the defendant completes his or her sentence, Washington Defender Association's Immigration Project. Department of Homeland Security can also issue detainers, although their grant of authority is restricted to "aliens arrested for controlled substances". However, Department of Homeland Security routinely places detainers on aliens who were not arrested for controlled substances, (Lasch 2008).

In the United States the immigration detainer is triggered when the jail's lawful authority to detain the individual expires: 1) The case is pending and the Court orders release, 2) The case is dismissed and the person is to be released, 3) A conviction is entered and the defendant completes his or her sentence, Washington Defender Association's Immigration Project. Department of Homeland Security can also issue detainers, although their grant of authority is restricted to "aliens arrested for controlled substances". Department of Homeland Security "maintains its own detention centers operated by private correction companies, but places most immigration detainees in bed space rented from local jails administered by government corrections officers" (Cianciarulo 2008).

According to Amnesty International (June 2009) more than 300,000 men and women are detained by U.S. immigration. About 33,400 people are in detention on any given day, (Rabin 2009). How long a person can be detained was answered in a United States Supreme Court case, Zadvydas v. Davis . The issue in that case was how long can an alien be detained after the 90-day statutory "removal period" has expired? The case reviewed the extent of the Attorney General's authority under the post-removal period detention statute to keep an alien "indefinitely". Justice Breyer, writing for the majority, held that "the proceeding at issue here are civil, not criminal, and we assume that they are not punitive in purpose and effect. There is not sufficiently strong special justification here for indefinite civil detention at least as administered under this statue." As evidence in this opinion the Court describes immigration law as a "civil" law, even though a person detained under the immigration laws of the United States are treated as a "criminals" by being held in jail like facility. "Detention facilities are indistinguishable from jails, and in fact, jails and prisons often house immigration detainees along with people serving or awaiting criminal sentences, (Rabin 2009). The Court concluded by holding that "once removal is no longer reasonably foreseeable, continued detention is no longer authorized", in essences the alien cannot be held indefinitely.

I did not find any term in my research on Mexico's immigration law and term similar to the United States "detainer", even though illegal immigrants are held in a detention facility. The General Population Law was reformed in 2008 to decriminalize undocumented migration according to a report by Mexico Embassy (2010). However in the past Mexico's treatment of detained individuals was punished criminally. In the Report for Congress a review was conducted of Mexico's immigration policies. The report claims that "the highest punishment frames for immigration offense are found in Mexico, and these aim at coping with the problems of transient immigration." According to the National Institute of Immigration in Mexico, there are 215, 695 persons detained in Mexico 2,214 are women.

In the United States there are no criminal sanctions for being in the United States illegally. In Mexico Articles 117-124 of the Law of Population outlines the sanctions for persons being in the country illegally, the first offense is punished by a fine and reoffenders are punished up to ten years in prison, (Mellin and Spencer 2003).

Detainees in both the United States and Mexico will no doubt endure many hardships, even though their crime was only coming into a country without the proper documentation to make a better life. Women have become a growing part of the population detained, "The detention of women in significant numbers is a recent trend", (Rabin 2009). In the article the author reviews detention of women in detention facilities in Arizona. The author states the government's failure at detention facilities to address individual circumstances including the detainees health care needs, failure of the facilities to respond to the needs of pregnant detainees, and the use of shackles and strip searches. The author urges "gender specific regulations to address the mental health needs of women in detention who are either asylum seekers or victims of recent violence." "For women who are survivors of torture, rape, and other forms of gender-based violence and persecution, detention can exacerbate symptoms of post-traumatic stress and depression".

One particular section of the population of illegal immigrants contains women who have been brought to either Mexico or the United States against their will, called human trafficking. Definition of trafficked person: This is someone who is transferred or transported across national or international borders by means of threat or coercion for the purpose of economic exploitation in prostitution, forced labor, slavery or the removal of organs" (Territo, Kirkham).The United Nations estimates that 4 million people are trafficked each year, (Kanics 1998). Both Mexico and the United States have laws against human trafficking. The International law against Human Trafficking is controlled by the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime known as the Palermo Convention. The Palermo Convention has three accompanying Protocols, including a protocol against human trafficking entitled "Protocol to Prevent, suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children. Mexico signed the convention protocols in 2000 and ratified it on April 11, 2003 (Cicero-Dominguez2005).. The signing of the Convention of 2000 and its Protocols by Mexico shows Mexico's interest in addressing the crime of "Human Trafficking". (The Palermo Convention has some legal issues not related to this paper but are noted for the reader). However Mexico "lacks a universal strategy to protect trafficking victims, and that, although uncoordinated, some polices do assist Mexican victims, primarily minors. However, while foreign minors may get some assistance, the DOS expresses that generally, undocumented foreigners including those who may be potential trafficking victims, can face extended detention and deportation" (Cicero-Dominguez 2005). According to the Trafficking in Persons Report over 16,000-20,00 Mexican and Central American are estimated to be sex victim in Mexico and which a significant number of who are ultimately sent to the United States, (Cicero-Dominguez 2005). The United States Government currently estimates that 600,000 to 800,000 individuals are trafficked across international borders each year, The United States, Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005

Congress passed the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000. Part of the act, provides immigration relief in the form of a non-immigrant visa, known as a "U visa", to survivors of crimes including domestic violence, kidnapping, rape, torture, incest, and female genital mutilation." However to date no "U visas" have been issued due to delay in regulations implementation, New Mexico Law Review The TVPA provides specific relief for victims of international human trafficking, however, relatively few individuals have received a T. visa. The Department of Health and Human Services reports that 14,500-17,500 people are trafficked through and into the United States every year but immigration officials have found only 729 principal T visa applicants eligible". "Part of the reason is that only 1,175 individuals have been officially identified as victims of human trafficking." (Cicero-Dominguez 2008). It is easy to deduce from these numbers that many immigrants brought to a Country against their will would be detained in a detention facility and treated as a criminal, and we can deduce that many are women.

"The nature of international human trafficking is such that the line between lawbreaker and victim is often blurred. Some individuals have been brought into the United States illegally against their will. Others have entered the United States illegally of their own free will, but have been forced to participate in criminal acts (such as prostitution) against their will", (Ciabciarulo2008). "Although detaining possible victims of trafficking in not a laudable practice from a humanitarian perspective, detention arguably serves at least two goals from a security standpoint: preventing non-victims from absconding are re-offending, and protecting victims from harm perpetrated by their traffickers " (Ciabciarulo2008). It is easy to conclude that due to language barriers, cultural differences, and the fear of prosecution being able to identify which group the person falls into can be difficult. Part of the problem of determining if an illegal immigrant/alien is in a country of their own free will or brought here against their will is their "fear" of being prosecuted , and therefore the refusal to cooperate with authorities to determine how they were brought into the country.

The new Arizona Bill is an example of how a state that is frustrated with the "immigration problems" tries to address them but in fact encourages prejudice, and possibility of affecting anyone that looks Mexica,n The bill will not become a law until late July, is defined in Senate Bill 1070, titled "Enforcement of Immigration Laws". Section B of the bill states: "For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States. A reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation." The controversy over this language is that the law makes it mandatory for the "street officer" to determine someone's immigration status. The fear is that this would mandate that an officer stop anyone, in the state of Arizona, that looks "Mexican". An example of the possibility of an American citizen, who looks Mexican, being illegal detained happened recently to Eduardo Caraballo in Chicago when he was arrested as a suspect in a crime but was denied bail because he "looked Mexican", (Branco 2010). Although this incident happened in Chicago it clearly shows that there is a possibility that someone that is here in the United States, legally could be held "illegal" as an alien, until the authorities are satisfied that they are here legally.

The United States and Mexico each have their laws and policies to deal with illegal immigrants. In the US illegally entering the country is a civil matter but the immigrants are treated as criminals. In Mexico the immigrants are detained and can be punished by a jail sentence. This is a miscarriage of justice since most of these people are simply trying to improve their lives. The "human element" is often overlooked. The fact that some of the illegal immigrants are victims of human trafficking only adds to the injustice of our immigration problem. There are no simple answers to immigration problems. Treating them as "criminals" by either Country is definitely not the answer, especially when the group being punished could have been brought to the Country against their will.
EF_Kevin 8 / 13,321 129  
Jun 8, 2010   #2
...most of whom are from the neighboring country of Mexico.

By reviewing and comparing -----> it is possible to observe
By reviewing and comparing the immigration detention policies of both the United States and Mexico it is evident possible to observe that detention process is to punish the individual for entering the country without the proper documentation.

The term illegal immigrant, alien, and migrants, are all used interchangeably throughout the materials reviewed for this paper.

In order to avoid using judgmental language, some of us say "undocumented" instead of the harsh term "illegal."

A concern for a particular section of that population is individual 's individuals detained (mainly young women) who were brought to the Country country for illegal purpose such as for prostitution under the control of others termed "human trafficking". Both Countries countries have exceptions for individual...

Little typo here:
and possibility of affecting anyone that looks Mexica,n The bill will not

Now go back to your first paragraph and change that thesis statement to reflect what you are actually arguing. Your paper starts by saying this

By reviewing and comparing the immigration detention policies of both the United States and Mexico it is evident possible to observe that detention process is to punish the individual for entering the country without the proper documentation.

... but that is not actually the focus of the paper! Right after that sentence, add a sentence that tells your main idea for the essay, and the END THE FIRST PARAGRAPH so the reader will now for sure what you are arguing in the paper.

:-)
OP Paula6 1 / 1  
Jun 8, 2010   #3
Thanks Kevin. I am still afraid I will lose the writer.
EF_Kevin 8 / 13,321 129  
Jun 10, 2010   #4
Do you mean "lose the reader?"


Home / Writing Feedback / Treatment of Illegal Immagrants - U.S. versus Mexico
Writing
Editing Help?
Fill in one of the forms below to get professional help with your assignments:

Graduate Writing / Editing:
GraduateWriter form ◳

Best Essay Service:
CustomPapers form ◳

Excellence in Editing:
Rose Editing ◳

AI-Paper Rewriting:
Robot Rewrite ◳