Created under the George W. Bush administration in 2003 as a response to the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been subject to numerous controversies, making it a hot topic of debate in recent years. Serving as a replacement for the previous Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), ICE is split in two different divisions: Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) and Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). Together, these two divisions carry out three major tasks: deporting undocumented immigrants, enforcing immigration laws, and investigating potential transnational criminal and terroristic threats. Though ICE has operated under the Bush and Obama administration, it has only recently come to the attention of many Americans and mainstream media. This is largely due to the election of Donald Trump and his “zero tolerance” policy on illegal immigration, as well as a 2017 Executive Order expanding ICE and shifting its target from undocumented immigrants with criminal records to all undocumented immigrants. This caused large debates over whether ICE should continue to operate, be reformed, or be completely abolished and replaced by another system.
Over the last decade, the number of arrests and deportations of undocumented immigrants performed by ICE has generally increased. Though the amount of deportations is actually lower now than it was under the Obama administration, the number of ICE arrests rose by 42% from 2016 to 2017. This is in part due to the aforementioned Executive Order in 2017, shifting ICE’s focus to encompass more than just criminals. Additionally, Congressional funding for ICE has nearly tripled since 2003, going from $3.3 billion in 2003 to $8.4 billion in 2020.
From separating family due to arrests, to deleting records of abuse, to running inhumane detention camps along the border, ICE frequently receives criticism and accusations of human rights abuses. The American Civil Liberties Union reported ICE’s arresting techniques as infringing on “the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches...the constitutional guarantee of due process, and the constitutional guarantee of equal protection and freedom from discrimination.” Most recently, President Trump attempted to remove F-1 and M-1 visas from international students who would be returning to school virtually in the fall, allowing ICE to deport these students. However, after public scrutiny and legal actions from universities such as Harvard and MIT, this policy was rescinded.
The effects of ICE’s rapid expansion and reported wrongdoings have been clear: many Americans now see ICE as an immigration police and a symbol of the growing xenophobia in the American government, rather than an organization trying to keep Americans safe. Thus, the umbrella term #AbolishICE movement commenced in 2017, and took on a more formal legislative role in 2018, with progressive Democrats beginning to implement it in their policies. Politicians such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Elizabeth Warren, Mark Pocan, and Kamala Harris have all clearly spoken out against ICE through either legislation or spoken word. Like most organizational issues, some favor reform, like Senator Harris, or complete abolition, like Rep. Pocan, who went as far as to propose legislation to the House floor.
Abolishing ICE completely, however, is not likely to happen and few are actually pushing for that. Many, such as the aforementioned Senator Harris, seek to defund and reform ICE or transfer its most important duties to a new commission and remove the original one. This is all in hopes of reducing arrests on ordinary undocumented immigrants and shifting the focus back to undocumented immigrants with serious criminal records. Many push for the end of family separation, detention centers, and the “tough” rhetoric placed on undocumented immigrants. Additionally, some ICE agents have even spoken out against ICE’s current, broad focus, including the group which sent a letter to Kirstjen Nielsen, the Secretary of Homeland Security at that time. These agents worked in one of ICE’s aformentioned sub-agencies, the Homeland Security Investigations department (HSI), which is primarily tasked with detaining undocumented immigrants with serious criminal records.
However, many have rejected the move to abolish ICE largely due to the growing nativism seen not only in the United States, but throughout the rest of the world—most notably Europe. A large portion of Americans defend ICE and believe that a tough stance on undocumented immigration is necessary for homeland security. In fact, a 2018 Politico survey found that 54% of the respondents oppose abolishing ICE. Additionally, some of the criticism directed towards ICE would actually be the fault of Customs and Border Patrols (CBP), notable for the wrongdoings occurring directly at the border. However, as previously mentioned, the push to abolish ICE has been a rather broad, umbrella term and ICE has still been reported to commit a lot of the criticism it receives.
Despite the growing nativist ideologies and President Trump’s “zero-tolerance” policy on undocumented immigration, many organizations are still trying to help undocumented immigrants acquire the materials they need to go through the legal process. To name a few, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) defends the rights of immigrants, the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES) provides affordable legal services to immigrants, and ActBlue serves a general donation site to several non-profit organizations tasked with helping immigrants. Please consider checking out their websites and donating if possible.
Sources
Comentarios