The American Immigrant Policy Portal

Managing International Protection Needs at Borders,
Robert Bosch Stiftung & Migration Policy Institute, July 2024, 30 pp.
Authors: Lucia Salgado et al
This study described the features of a more effective asylum system, one that maintains an international protection system but that avoids “the outbreak (or perception) of chaos” at the borders – a development that could lead to the closing down of the entire system. Although many countries, including the U.S., are developing procedures for screening asylum applicants at locations distant from their borders, how these migrants are treated at borders remains an important issue. The authors argue for the creation of differentiated procedures for various cases, e.g. conducting admissibility or merit assessment procedures at the border and quickly channeling straightforward cases into complete asylum procedures. They also argue for the co-location of multiple governmental resources at border locations to expedite the approval of legitimate asylum cases and initiate returns of those without any appropriate protection need. The study also assess the pros and cons of requiring asylum seekers to request asylum only at regular border crossings.  The authors also stress the importance of system adaptability, the ability to scale aspects of the system up or down depending on the volume of border crossings. Finally, they call for adequate investment in resources for the asylum system and the avoidance of funding initiatives in times of crisis, as building staff and procedures for an influx of asylum applicants takes a lot of time.

The Fiscal Impact of Refugees and Asylees at the Federal, State, and Local Levels from 2005 to 2019,

Department of Health and Human Services, February 2024, 53 pp.
Authors: Robin Ghertner et alz
Between 1990 and 2022, the United States accepted over 2.1 million refugees and granted asylum to more than 800,000 individuals. These individuals were accepted into our country for humanitarian purposes but also had an impact on the American economy. This report presents the first federal study estimating the net fiscal impact of refugees and asylees on government finances, focusing on the period from 2005 to 2019. The study aims to inform federal decision-making regarding resettlement services and enhance the understanding of the economic contributions of refugees and asylees. The study finds that the net fiscal impact of refugees and asylees was positive over the 15-year period, amounting to $123.8 billion. The federal government benefited by $31.5 billion, while state and local governments saw a net benefit of $92.3 billion. This study did not examine the fiscal impact of the offspring of refugees and asylees. Nor did it estimate the impact of subgroups of refugees, such as country of origin, length of time in the U.S., or English proficiency. In addition, the study only examined the 15-year period from 2005 through 2019, and thus the results may not be generalizable to other time periods.

New York and Other U.S. Cities Struggle with High Costs of Migrant Arrivals,
Migration Policy Institute, September 27, 2023, 7 pp.
Authors: Muzaffar Chishti et al
This article examines the financial strain placed on cities around the U.S. seeking to integrate the record number of asylum seekers and other migrants entering the U.S. in recent years. The situation is exacerbated by the absence of federal support to defray state and local costs, long waits to obtain work authorization, and the fact that large numbers of recent arrivals do not have any family members in the U.S. Unlike in the past, when migrants arriving without authorization tended to avoid federal authorities, today’s arrivals have already been processed by the government, so may be more inclined to seek government help. The paper reviews steps already taken by the federal government to ease the burden on cities, e.g. granting temporary protective status (and work authorization) to Venezuelans in the U.S. The authors also discuss the “patchy government safety net” which excludes recent arrivals from many government assistance programs. Much of the report focuses on the housing challenges confronting northern cities, some of which, like New York, are under legislative or court mandate to provide housing to anyone who seeks it.  The growing demand for migrant housing tends to exacerbate a preexisting housing crisis in many cities.  The authors conclude that “cities require tools and resources to both meet migrants’ immediate needs and assist their long-term integration.”

At the Breaking Point: Rethinking the U.S. Immigration Court System,
Migration Policy Institute, July 2023, 47 pp.
Authors: Muzaffar Chishti et al
The U.S. immigration court system faces a profound crisis, according to this report entitled "Challenges and Reforms in U.S. Immigration Courts" published by the Migration Policy Institute. This crisis has created a backlog of almost 2 million cases, leading to significant delays in case resolution. In 2022, an unprecedented 708,000 new cases were added. Asylum applicants, making up 40% of the caseload, face a grave situation. They experience an average wait of four years for their hearings, with even longer waits for final decisions. This extended backlog and the low rate of return to their home countries fuel the surge in migration to the U.S.-Mexico border and erode the integrity of the immigration adjudication and enforcement systems. The report discusses the various issues contributing to the court crisis, from long-standing operational challenges to evolving crises in the Americas. The authors suggest reforms that the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) can take to improve court performance and the broader immigration system, many of which have already been initiated by the Biden administration. Recommendations include prioritizing cases on a "last-in, first-decided" basis, terminating cases not meeting prosecutorial guidelines, centralizing case referrals from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), establishing two tiers of immigration judges, expanding specialized dockets, and reinstating the asylum officer rule. Other suggested reforms include greater leverage of technology and expanded access to legal representation. (The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)

High-Stakes Asylum: How Long an Asylum Case Takes and How We Can Do Better,
American Immigration Lawyers Association, June 14, 2023, 25 pp.
Author: Amy Grenier
This report discusses the current state of the asylum process in the United States and offers recommendations for improving the system. The Biden Administration has implemented policies to screen asylum seekers and expand legal pathways for protection, but it has also accelerated and truncated the asylum system with policies like the 2022 asylum processing rule and the dedicated dockets program. The report draws on the expertise of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) and its members, who provided detailed responses to a survey about the steps and time required to prepare an asylum case. The report concludes that the minimum time required for an attorney to properly prepare an asylum case is 50 to 75 hours, but cases with complications can take much longer. Factors such as detention, past trauma, language barriers, and procuring evidence from foreign countries or expert witnesses can add time to the process. The report recommends increasing agency resources and capacity, eliminating existing delays, and implementing a system-wide, all-of-government approach to improve asylum processing and manage migration at the southern border. It emphasizes the need for an asylum system that protects asylum seekers, ensures a fair legal process, and efficiently identifies legitimate claims for humanitarian protection. The report also makes specific recommendations, such as allowing adequate time for asylum seekers to obtain counsel and prepare their cases, waiving or exempting asylum seekers from deadlines outside of their control, reducing government delays and inefficiency, improving legal access and representation, reducing immigration detention, and implementing various improvements to the asylum process. Overall, the article calls for congressional action to appropriate the funding required to meet the systemic demands of the asylum system and ensure that America's immigration system is ready for the future.

Allies in Limbo: The U.S. Immigration Response,
Social Science Reseaarch Network, June 13, 2023, 43 pp.
Author: Lindsay Muir Harris
A professor of Law at the University of the District of Columbia, Lindsay Harris considers U.S. treatment of Afghan refugees since the fall of Kabul as the “latest episode in the long history of racism in the creation, execution, and implementation of immigration policy in the United States.” This bias is most obvious in the disparate treatment of Ukrainians and Afghans in recent refugee policy. Although 67,000 Afghans were admitted to the U.S. after the fall of Saigon, they were only granted temporary parole status lasting two years. Although regularization of status was possible through the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program, derisively called the “spectacular failure” program by one analyst, very few Afghans were able to qualify for this program. The only other route was the backlogged asylum process, which requires an individualized evidence standard that is hard to comply with, as well as many years of waiting for a final decision. Like Ukrainians fleeing the Russian invasion, not all Afghans will have an individualized fear of harm; many are fleeing generalized violence and very difficult conditions under Taliban rule. In the meantime, Congress has failed to approve the Afghan Adjustment Act, designed to remedy these problems. The author believes that the Afghans admitted to the U.S. should be treated presumptively as refugees, thereby granting them a path to full citizenship. The essay also compares the treatment of Afghans stranded abroad with Ukrainians fleeing their home country. The latter find it much easier to secure parole status in the U.S., while most Afghans have been denied admission, including the thousands of SIV applicants left behind in Afghanistan.

Improving Language Access in the U.S. Asylum System,
Center for American Progress, May 23, 2023, 18 pp.
Author: Zefitret Abera Molla
A lack of access to language services can lead to disastrous outcomes for people in immigration proceedings. In a report for The Center for American Progress entitled “Improving Language Access in the U.S. Asylum System,” the author focuses on the diversity of languages spoken by migrants and asylum-seekers, the challenges government agencies face in ensuring language access, and steps taken by the Biden administration to address the problem. The article concludes with recommendations to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to improve language access. While English-to-Spanish interpretation and translation services are largely available, migrants speaking Indigenous, Sign, African or Asian languages -- although a large and growing share of the population -- often lack such supportive services and run the risk of grave consequences, such as deportation, as a result. The Biden administration has taken several steps to address the issue, including appointing a language access coordinator to the DOJ. The DHS has also produced a Draft Indigenous Language Access Plan developed together with Indigenous community leaders. The author concludes with a few policy recommendations, including: providing relevant training of Customs and Border Protection agents, translating essential materials into at least five of the most spoken indigenous languages, and creating alternatives to written materials. (The Immigrant Learning Center's Public Education Institute)

Beyond a Border Solution: How to Build a Humanitarian Protection System that Won’t Break,
American Immigration Council, May 3, 2023, 23 pp.
This paper is organized around a series of 13 recommendations to improve the U.S. system for handling the increased numbers of asylum seekers crossing our southern border. Recommendations cover short-term, urgently-needed improvements in capacity to handle the flow of migrants—for example, by improving Border Patrol capacity for humanitarian processing; medium-term changes for the handling of asylum seekers once they are in the U.S.—for example, by increasing the use of case management alternatives to detention; and longer-term solutions to address the root causes of migration and bringing our humanitarian protections and immigration system in line with the needs of both migrants and the U.S. in the 21st century—by, for example, creating new legal pathways for permanent immigration. For each recommendation, the authors provide a background section that clearly explains the problem and (where appropriate) a section that proposes actions that can be taken through the President’s executive authority, and another section describing policy changes and funding decisions that ultimately must be made by Congress. The goal of the recommendations is to move the U.S. away from what the authors consider to be a failed, decades-long focus on deterrence and towards a system better able to respond to today’s reality, in which increasing numbers of people are forced from their homes for reasons that may not fit conventions established many decades ago. (Maurice Belanger, Maurice Belanger Associates)

Review of Challenges in Afghan Placement and Assistance Program,
Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of State, March 2023, 25 pp.
This report examined challenges faced by the agencies implementing this program. Because the Afghan Placement program was a one-time, emergency program, the report’s authors did not make formal recommendations, but sought to identify lessons for future similar efforts. The biggest challenge faced by the agencies was the rapid pace of Afghan arrivals at a time when staffing of the agencies and their affiliates had been greatly reduced due to the lowering of refugee admissions during the Trump administration. Amid a housing shortage in many areas, finding permanent housing for the refugees proved to be a major challenge, in part due to increasing corporate ownership of rental property. Resettlement agencies also noted that a lack of cultural orientation prior to arrival in the U.S. (a feature of the regular refugee resettlement program) led to, among other things, unrealistic expectations among Afghans being resettled. The report also describes challenges from delayed or inaccurate documentation for the Afghans; unclear program guidance; a tracking system that was difficult to use; and inadequate access to health care for the Afghan parolees, especially mental health care. The report also listed aspects of the program that worked well from the perspective of the resettlement agencies. While many of the challenges reported by the resettlement agencies were beyond the control of the State Department, the report concludes that lessons learned from this program will be useful for future situations in which a large population must be resettled in an emergency. (Maurice Belanger, Maurice Belanger Associates)

Refugee Resettlement per Capita: Which States do the Most?
Immigration Research Initiative, March 7, 2023, 5 pp.
The United States takes in refugees from many different countries, but policies, capacities, and outcomes vary by state. In a new report from the Immigration Research Initiative titled “Refugee Resettlement per Capita: Which States Do the Most?” the size of the refugee population in different states is examined from varying perspectives. First, the report lists the states with the highest total refugee arrivals in the past 10 years. The top five in this category were Texas (43,527), California (39,509), New York (26,586), Michigan (22,769) and Ohio (20,892). The report then lists the states with the highest number of refugees per 100,000 population. The top five states in this category were Nebraska (379), North Dakota (378), Idaho (346), Kentucky (325) and South Dakota (312). Finally, the report lists the states with the highest number of refugees per 100,000 immigrants. The top five in this category were South Dakota (9,015), North Dakota (8,662), Kentucky (8,061), Vermont (7,356) and Idaho (5,700). The report concludes by identifying general trends in refugee resettlement in the U.S. -- highlighting the dramatic decrease in refugee arrivals since the Trump administration.

Welcoming Afghans and Ukrainians to the United States: A Case in Similarities and Contrasts,
Migration Policy Institute, July 13, 2022, 9 pp.
Authors:  Muzaffar Chishti & Jessica Bolter
In the past year, Ukrainian and Afghan citizens made up the largest nationality-specific parole programs since the modern refugee resettlement system began in 1980. Welcoming Afghans and Ukrainians to the United States: A Case in Similarities and Contrasts highlights the parallel, yet dissimilar treatment that Ukrainian and Afghan arrivals have received from the U.S. government over the past year. The authors emphasize the importance of parole status in successfully admitting both Ukrainians and Afghans to the United States, yet also stress its problematic nature, as parole status offers no pathway to permanent residency. Data drawn from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and NBC News further highlights the disproportionately strong significance that parole has played for these people, over other difficult admission channels such as the refugee resettlement program. The authors suggest that Congress pass legislation to allow parolees a path to permanent residency, as historically has been the case with large parole programs in the past. They additionally recommend that combining Ukrainian and Afghan Adjustment Acts into one piece of legislation could provide greater momentum for passage, helping both groups find paths to permanent residency and stability in the U.S. (Stephanie Depauw for The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)
 

The Missing Link: Connecting Eligible Asylees and Asylum Seekers with Benefits and Services,
Migration Policy Institute, July 2022, 40 pp.
Authors: Essey Workie et al
The United States has a history of providing humanitarian protection, including resettling refugees from abroad and granting asylum to those applying within the country or at its borders. Refugees and asylees are often fleeing from persecution on the basis of their race, religion, nationality or political opinion. Asylees are eligible for many of the same services and benefits as refugees, but information about their eligibility is limited to the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) website and a pamphlet by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). This report, from the Migration Policy Institute, describes the benefits and services for which asylees and asylum seekers are eligible, the mechanisms connecting them with these programs, and opportunities to improve their access to such assistance. Research has found that asylees experience service gaps in health screening, education, employment, housing stability and food security. Asylum seekers cannot legally work for at least six months after they file their application for asylum. Cases often take years, and without the ability to work or access benefits, asylum seekers can face deep poverty, labor exploitation and human trafficking. The report suggests that the federal government can address this problem by developing a national system of outreach, information and referral services, and improving data collection to better measure program participation. State and local governments and philanthropic organizations can play a greater role in linking children of asylum seekers to available services. Not only would this result in greater program participation, it would also allow these residents to contribute more to their local economies. (The Immigrant Learning Center’s Pubic Education Institute)
 

A Shameful Record: Biden Administration’s Use of Trump Policies Endangers People Seeking Asylum,
Human Rights First, January 2022, 20 pp.
Authors: Julia Neusner et al
Since the Biden administration took office, Human Rights First has counted more than 8,705 reports of kidnappings and other violent attacks on migrants and asylum seekers who were blocked in and/or ejected to Mexico by the U.S. government. Their report, A Shameful Record: Biden Administration’s Use of Trump Policies Endangers People Seeking Asylum, details the administration’s continued implementation and expansion of what the authors call illegal and deadly Trump administration policies preventing asylum-seeking at U.S. ports of entry and on the southern border, exposing them to extensive and grave danger. The administration’s use of the Title 42 and Remain in Mexico (RMX) policies has "perpetuated their inherent cruelty, disorder, and the racist tropes in which they are rooted,” resulting in extensive human suffering. For this report, Human Rights First researchers interviewed migrants and asylum seekers, attorneys, shelter and other humanitarian workers, Mexican government officials, and legal monitors, both in-person and remotely. They tracked the implementation of the RMX policy in Ciudad Juárez in person in December of 2021 and interviewed 18 individuals returned due to RMX. They also utilized data from an electronic survey of asylum seekers in Mexico from September of 2021 to December of 2021 conducted by Al Otro Lado, among other sources. The report makes several recommendations, including ending Title 42 expulsions, resuming the ending of the RMX policy, and restoring access to asylum at U.S. ports of entry and on the southern border. (Erika Hernandez for the Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)

Department of Homeland Security Operation Allies Welcome Afghan Evacuee Report: Fiscal Year 2022 Report to Congress,
Department of Homeland Security, December 2021, 10 pp.
This report is a summary presented by DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to Congress of the first 60 days of resettlement in the U.S. of 76,000 Afghan evacuees. While there were evacuees admitted who were already legal permanent residents, had valid nonimmigrant visas, were admitted under the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program, or were Priority 1 or Priority 2, the vast majority had no official status and were paroled into the country. Many of those could be deemed priority 1 or 2, or even be eligible for SIV status, but up to November 2021 had only been granted humanitarian parole while their cases could be sorted out. The report also gives numbers for evacuees still at the U.S. base at Qatar, those who were further resettled to Canada and Australia, and a few who were deemed inadmissible and who were deported. All the data presented in the report is accurate as of November 15, 2021. (William Westerman, New Jersey City University)

The Impact of Nationality, Language, Gender and Age on Asylum Success,
TRAC Immigration, Syracuse University, December 7, 2021, 14 pp.
This report sheds light on how certain characteristics of asylum seekers have affected asylum outcomes over the past 20 years, Since the Biden Administration took office, asylum grant rates have increased from 29 percent during the previous administration to 37 percent. During some quarters (e.g., July-September 2021), the rate jumped to nearly 49 percent, which is higher than the asylum grant rate during the Obama Administration. In analyzing these numbers in greater detail, the report finds that the nationality, language spoken, gender, and age of the applicant are factors that have significant effect on asylum success rates. The authors at the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse found that under the Biden Administration, the nationality and primary language of asylum seekers mattered in similar degrees as under the Trump administration, noting that asylum seekers from certain regions of the world experienced a higher rate of success than others. The authors also found that, unlike under the previous administration, the Immigration Courts under the Biden Administration are more likely to grant asylum to women and children. (Jaisang Sun for The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)

Getting Refugees Out of Afghanistan,
Center for Migration Studies, September 7, 2021, 7 pp.
Author: Susan Martin
The perilous and chaotic exodus of Afghans from Afghanistan after the fall of the government gripped the world in the summer of 2021. Susan Martin, Donald G. Herzberg Professor of International Migration Emerita at Georgetown University, suggests that the global response to the flight of Indochinese refugees in 1979 from Vietnam and other Southeast Asian countries offers a model for responding to the Afghan crisis. She details how the Secretary-General of the United Nations, strongly backed by the United States, called an international conference in 1979 to address the crisis. This gathering resulted in numerous international commitments, including pledges to increase resettlement slots for refugees, Vietnam’s agreement to set up an orderly departure program, increases in military resources for rescuing refugees, and an increase in funding for the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. Accordingly, she makes several recommendations for the Afghan crisis, namely that the U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, backed by the Biden administration, should hold an international pledging conference concerning Afghan refugees at risk. Martin recommends that the United States make generous pledges of resettlement from within Afghanistan and neighboring countries of first asylum. Further, she recommends that the international community attempt to convince the Taliban to establish an Orderly Departure Program for Afghan refugees, incentivizing them by making it clear that only through their adherence to universal human rights standards will recognition of their government and access to humanitarian and development aid happen. (Erika Hernandez for The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)

New Demographic Directions in Forced Migration and Refugee Research,
Special Issue, Journal of Migration and Human Security, 9:3 (September 2021)
This special issue of the Journal of Migration and Human Security is devoted to improving the quality and relevance of demographic research as a tool in promoting successful refugee resettlement in the United States. Five of the seven papers in the issue are based on presentations made at a conference sponsored by the Committee on Population of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine in May of 2019.  A sixth article evolved from a follow-up virtual stakeholder meeting held in December of 2020.  The issue includes an introductory article that provides short summaries of all the papers. Among topics covered in the papers are ethical issues in conducting research, the importance of “grounded, bottoms-up approaches” in researching the experience of refugee children and adolescents, new measures of community resilience based on the experience of Vietnamese-Americans in New Orleans, the use of modeling and simulation as predictive tools, and innovative ways to drill down from existing data sets. The final paper of the issue elaborates the perspectives of members of the project steering committee regarding the priorities for research on US refugees and refugee communities.

Does Halting Refugee Resettlement Reduce Crime? Evidence from the US Refugee Ban,
American Political Science Review, 115:3 (August 2021), 8 pp.
Authors: Daniel Masterson & Vasil Yasenov
Many countries have reduced refugee admissions in recent years, in part due to fears that refugees and asylum seekers increase crime rates and pose a national security risk. The authors of this study leverage a natural experiment in the United States, where an Executive Order by then President Trump in January 2017 halted refugee resettlement. This policy change was sudden and significant—it resulted in the lowest number of refugees resettled on US soil since 1977 and a 66% drop in resettlement from 2016 to 2017. The effect of the order was greatest in those areas that received the greatest number of refugees prior to its issuance. The authors found that there was no discernible effect on county-level property or violent crime rates. They also examine the factors that may have produced these positive results, including the fact that the number of single men, a demographic generally more prone to criminality, was low among the U.S. refugee population, compared to some countries in Europe, and that screening procedures for admitting refugees to the U.S. were probably effective.

Biden Administration Asylum Processing Revamp at the U.S. Border Could Be a Game Changer,
Migration Policy Institute, August 2021, 3 pp.
Author: Dories Meissner
This commentary from MPI briefly explains a proposed rule issued by the Biden administration to overhaul the asylum system with the aim of more expeditiously handling cases of asylum seekers coming to the U.S. across the southern border. The rule proposes to shift adjudication of asylum claims from immigration courts to asylum officers. The new rule would authorize asylum officers to hear the entire asylum case (instead of merely conducting a “credible fear” interview), with the immigration courts acting more in an appellate capacity. The rule is also meant to reduce the immigration court workload, in which there were more than 600,000 pending asylum claims in August 2021. The author argues that asylum officers are better trained to assess asylum claims, and that the new system would bring expeditious relief to those with good asylum claims, while reducing the incentive for those with weak claims to make them and benefit from the lengthy delays in case processing. The author argues that the new rule should be part of a set of policies to better manage the border and the asylum caseload — policies such as universal representation for asylum seekers; a humane repatriation process for those who are not successful with their asylum claim but may still face desperate conditions in their home countries; and working with Central American countries to help bring more order and legality to migration flows. (Maurice Belanger, Maurice Belanger Associates)

Charting a Course to Rebuild and Strengthen the US Refugee Admissions Program
Center for Migration Studies & Refugee Council USA, December 2020, 57 pp.
Authors: Donald Kerwin & Mike Nicholson
Since the passage of the Refugee Act of 1980, the U.S. has resettled more than three million refugees, more than any other country. In the last few years, however, the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) has been decimated by Trump administration policies, through such measures as restricting admissions from Muslim-majority and African countries and setting progressively lower admissions ceilings. Charting a Course to Rebuild and Strengthen the US Refugee Admissions Program, published by the Center for Migration Studies (CMS), analyzes the current state of USRAP. The report draws on a 2020 national survey of resettlement stakeholders and argues that USRAP is an important program with widespread community support that offers a range of valuable and effective services. For instance, of the refugee respondents to the survey, 92 percent reported the program helped them support themselves soon after their arrival, and 77 percent said it helped them integrate into American society. Based on the information gleaned from these surveys, the authors recommend the incoming Biden administration rebuild and revitalize the program through means such as: increasing the refugee admission ceiling; providing stable funding for resettlement agencies; educating the public on the contributions of refugees and the program’s goals and effectiveness; and regaining bipartisan support for its objectives. Additionally, the authors put forth recommendations for programmatic improvements aimed at increasing the USRAP’s responsiveness to individual refugees’ needs, including: adopting a flexible, more expansive approach to resettlement through a broader definition of integration; providing access to trauma-informed and culturally attuned mental health services; prioritizing family reunification; and offering LGBTQ refugees programs tailored to their needs. (Georgia Whitaker for The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)

Distancing Refugees,
Denver Law Review, (97:4), August 26, 2020, 36 pp.
Author: Geoffrey Heeren
In 2018, nearly 30 million people around the world were displaced by persecution, conflict, violence or human rights violations. Nearly 26 million of these were refugees, and an additional 3.5 million had sought asylum in another country. Although the right to seek asylum is codified in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and many national constitutions, “Distancing Refugees” argues that developed countries responded to the increase in asylum seekers with efforts to externalize their borders and weaken their asylum systems. Author Geoffrey Heeren identifies the “encampment model,” which has warehoused refugees in developing countries for interminable periods, as one way that developed nations dismantled the normative force of asylum by constructing physical, psychological, and legal barriers between the public and asylum seekers. The encampment model, he argues, shifts the burden of refugee resettlement onto developing nations, thereby jeopardizing the health, food security and living conditions of claimants. “Distancing Refugees” cites past examples of refugee distancing policies, such as the U.S. government’s effort to prevent the entrance of Haitian and Central American asylum seekers in the 1980s and 1990s, to show how these policies can have unintended consequences. The article also analyzes legal challenges to the Trump Administration’s “Migrant Protection Protocol” and explains how a transnational legal process could contest refugee distancing in the long term. (Georgia Whitaker for The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute) 

More than a Wall: The Rise and Fall of US Asylum and Refugee Policy,
Journal on Migration and Human Security, August 31, 2020, 20 pp.
Author: Ruth Ellen Wassem
This article reviews the history of U.S. policy towards refugees and asylum seekers, from primarily reliance on executive actions (such as parole) before and after the two world wars, through the introduction of a formal refugee admissions regime after passage of the Refugee Act of 1980. That history was heavily influenced by U.S. geopolitical concerns, particularly during the cold war when persons fleeing communism were much more likely to gain status in the U.S. than those fleeing violent civil wars in countries controlled by U.S.-backed governments. The article briefly summarizes some of the policies implemented by the Trump administration that have “sent US humanitarian protection policy to an unprecedented nadir.” The author also includes an analysis of public opinion on refugees and asylees, and notes that, in the past 75 years, a majority of Americans have rarely supported the admission of refugees and asylees during a refugee crisis. During the Trump years, however, opposition to such admissions has decreased. The author concludes by observing that “generous humanitarian policies require energetic civic engagement and steadfast legislative efforts.” (Maurice Belanger, Maurice Belanger Associates)

Ethnic networks can foster the economic integration of refugees,
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, August 13, 2019, 6 pp.
Authors:  Linna Martén et al
While policymakers have long opposed resettling refugees into ethnic enclaves on the grounds that this reduces assimilation, new research from Europe suggests that resettling refugees in co-ethnic communities (communities with people of the same ethnicity) results in faster economic integration. In “Ethnic networks can foster the economic integration of refugees” the authors find that refugees assigned to live in locations with many co-nationals are more likely to enter the labor market and, thus, become economically integrated into their host countries. The study is based on a sample of asylum seekers in Switzerland, where refugees are allocated to cantons (member states of the Swiss Confederation) based on their population and are restricted from moving out of their assigned canton. Data from the State Secretariat of Migration allowed the researchers to track employment status from the point directly after arrival. Their analyses provide evidence to suggest that co-national and co-ethnolinguistic networks positively affect the probability of employment in the arrival year and peaks at three years after arrival. This study has implications for refugee resettlement policy, specifically calling into question the proposition that refugee dispersion in the host country promotes cultural integration. The authors suggest that access to nationality-, ethnic, or language-based networks could not only improve employment outcomes for refugees but would also have positive economic impact on host societies. (Kristine Germar for The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)

Refugees and Asylees in the United States,
Migration Policy Institute, June 13, 2019, 14 pp.
Authors: Brittany Blizzard & Jeanne Batalova
For many years, the United States was the global leader in refugee resettlement. Because of restrictive new policies of the Trump administration, this is not the case anymore. This report from the Migration Policy Institute uses data from the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security to sketch the demographic profile of the U.S. refugee and asylum seeker populations. While the Obama administration admitted just under 85,000 refugees into the country in 2016, the Trump administration, by contrast, allowed only 22,500 refugees in 2018 -- a record low. This drastic reduction is especially significant because, according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 68.5 million people across the globe were displaced in 2017 -- a record high. The report describes the status of refugees and asylum seekers in the U.S. including their countries of origin, places of resettlement as well as information about age, gender, and religious beliefs. The report also provides links to selected resources on refugee policy and resettlement in the U.S. (Deb D’Anastasio for The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)

Promoting Refugee Integration in Challenging Times: The Potential of Two-Generation Strategies,
Migration Policy Institute, December 2018, 52 pp.
Authors: Mark Greenberg et al
In the period from 2016 to 2018, refugee resettlement agencies in the United States faced numerous obstacles. In 2018, the Trump administration drastically reduced the yearly cap on refugee arrivals to 45,000, and only admitted 23,000 of these individuals seeking safety from violence and persecution. As a result, funding for refugee resettlement agencies has been reduced. This MPI study recommends that agencies use this historically low point in refugee arrivals to reflect on the best practices available to integrate refugees into their communities, so as to achieve long-term stability and success. Traditionally, refugee resettlement providers have focused primarily on helping adults find employment as fast as possible. However, MPI started a project to research how “two-generation” models may improve outcomes for refugee families. “Two-generation” or “whole family” models assume that when resettlement agencies seek to meet the needs of refugee children as well as adults, the entire family benefits. Through interviews with volunteers and state coordinators and visits to resettlement agencies, MPI found that many agencies were already employing two-generation strategies in three important ways: assisting refugee children, helping adults qualify for more family-sustaining employment, and meeting the broader needs of refugee families. For example, nonprofits in Michigan started Early Head Start classrooms that seek both to employ refugees and to educate refugee children. Utah’s refugee resettlement agency hosts short, intensive trainings for refugees to earn professional certificates in web development, medical manufacturing and other in-demand careers. Agencies in Colorado have been connecting senior refugees with mental health resources and community sponsors. In this climate of uncertainty, MPI recommends that community groups, nonprofits and refugee resettlement agencies work together to find innovative solutions to improve the lives of as many refugees as possible, and that the national Office of Refugee Resettlement revise outcome measures beyond short-term indicators focused on refugee adults only. (Deb D'Anastasio for The Immigrant Learning Center's Public Education Institute)

Private-Sector Humanitarians?  New Approaches in the Global Refugee Response,
Urban Institute, September 2018, 28 pp.
Authors:  Ammar A. Malik et al
This research report examines the potential for partnerships between private, for-profit corporations and non-governmental organizations in providing services to refugees and other “people of concern.” The authors believe that new approaches are necessary because of an increase in the numbers of refugees worldwide and a decrease in traditional corporate philanthropy. Based on a review of existing reports and a number of semi-structured interviews with individuals who have experience in for-profit/NGO partnerships, the authors offer some guidelines for partnership development. A key concern of the report is how a lack of transparency between partners may lead to a lack of trust. The authors also stress that partners may struggle to understand each other’s worldview and mission. For that reason, they highlight the role of local intermediaries in bringing together disparate organizations. They also suggest that successful partnerships rely upon the skills of senior leaders who can clarify goals and maintain lines of communication. The authors recognize that these partnerships have significant start-up costs and that the for-profit partner must be able to articulate and realize financial goals in order to satisfy shareholders. The non-governmental partner must also receive guarantees that their mission and image will not be compromised by associating with a particular company. At the conclusion of the report, the authors propose the creation of a global clearinghouse that would advance the idea of these partnerships and share information and expertise with each sector. The Urban institute has also published a companion case study of a partnership between IKEA and the Jordan River Foundation to provide employment opportunities for Syrian refugees and Jordanian women in Jordan. (Erik Jacobson, Montclair State University)

Asylum Processing and Waitlists at the U.S. – Mexico Border,
Robert Strauss Center for International Security and Law, University of Texas (Austin) et al, December, 2018, 24 pp.
Authors: Stephanie Leutert et al
Since 2016, wait times for asylum processing at ports of entry on the southern border have increased due largely to a procedure called “metering,” i.e. limiting the number of asylum seekers who can be processed per day or turning them away before they reach a port of entry. This practice has created great hardship among immigrants from Central America and the Caribbean, many of whom have travelled for weeks or months to get to the border, and now have to wait up to three more months in Mexico before being processed. Metering has also caused consternation among Mexican government and social services officials, who must manage these temporary residents in their border cities. This report uses fieldwork conducted in eight cities along the U.S.-Mexico border to gain insight into the effects of metering on asylum seekers and surrounding communities. Advocates argue that the deliberately slow processing of asylum claims, as well as policies that reflect a “zero-tolerance” policy towards undocumented immigrants entering via land borders, violates international conventions on processing asylum claims. Furthermore, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers have given false information to asylum seekers and erroneously turned them away from the border. The report calls for institutional policy change within CBP to address these deficiencies as well as an end to intimidation and coercive tactics toward a deeply vulnerable population of asylum seekers. (Mia Fasano for The Immigration Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)

Uprooted in Central America and Mexico:  Migrant and refugee children face a vicious cycle of hardship and danger,
UNICEF Child Alert, August 2018, 25 pp.
This report outlines the harsh process and painful consequences of migration on children and families fleeing extreme violence and poverty in Central America and Mexico. These conditions, combined with lack of economic and educational opportunity, spur irregular migration, but stricter border control merely increases hardship for migrants. Forcible return to countries of origin often prompts additional attempts at migration. Detention and family separation are deeply traumatizing experiences that can affect a child’s long-term development and act as a trigger for present and future mental illness.  Many alternatives to detention exist, including community-based care, group homes and foster care, all of which have had positive results for families and unaccompanied minors. UNICEF urges United Nations member states to adopt a 6-point “agenda for action” to safeguard the health and well-being of migrant and refugee children. This agenda includes action points addressing all aspects of the migration experience, including the root causes of migration, detention, family separation, protecting children from all forms of violence, and, finally, steps to promote reintegration and address discrimination and xenophobia for children and migrants who have been returned to their countries of origin. (Sam Jones for The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)

The U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program – a Return to First Principles: How Refugees Help to Define, Strengthen, and Revitalize the United States,
Center for Migration Studies, June 2018, 34 pp.
Author: Donald Kerwin
The United States has historically welcomed refugees fleeing violence and persecution in their home countries. Refugees have increased the cultural diversity, economic competitiveness and security of their adopted homeland. Since 1980 alone, the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) has resettled more than three million refugees in the U.S. However, the Trump administration has drastically reduced the number of refugees allowed into the U.S. (45,000 in Fiscal 2018) and slashed USRAP’s budget as part of its broader effort to limit legal immigration. Arguing that the refugee resettlement program serves U.S. interests and values, the report details the contributions refugees make to U.S. society. The authors use data from the American Community Survey to analyze the demographics, achievements and integration of over one million refugees. Findings indicate that refugees participate in the labor force, start businesses and earn college degrees at high rates. For example, 68 percent of refugees participate in the labor force, compared to 63 percent of the total U.S. population. In addition, a higher percentage of refugees are self-employed, indicating that they create more jobs than non-refugees. Given the value of refugees to American society, as well as the need for U.S leadership to address the global crisis of displaced persons, the author suggests that individuals and organizations should facilitate refugee resettlement as well as advocate for generous refugee admissions to members of Congress. (Deb D’Anastasio for The Immigrant Learning Center’s Public Education Institute)