The law that broke US immigration

Summary

In the early 1990s, immigration was a contentious issue in the US, with many Americans viewing immigrants as a burden. The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) aimed to decrease undocumented immigration but had the opposite effect. It expanded deportable crimes and introduced the strict 3 and 10-year bars, making legal pathways nearly impossible and incentivizing undocumented immigrants to stay. Despite changing public attitudes toward immigrants, the laws remain unchanged, highlighting the ineffectiveness of deterrent-based policies and the need for reform.

Takeaways

• 📺 In the early 1990s, immigration became a highly contentious issue in the US, with most Americans viewing immigrants as a burden.
• 🇺🇸 There were around 5 million undocumented immigrants in the US at the time, and public sentiment leaned toward decreasing immigration.
• ⚖️ The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 was passed to reduce undocumented immigration but ultimately increased it.
• 🔄 Before 1996, undocumented immigrants frequently moved back and forth between the US and Mexico for temporary work.
• ❌ The IIRIRA drastically expanded deportable crimes, including minor infractions, and made deportation more automatic, leading to a spike in deportations.
• ⏳ The law also introduced the 3 and 10-year bars, which made it nearly impossible for undocumented immigrants to gain legal status without leaving the US for extended periods.
• 🚫 These bars incentivized undocumented immigrants to stay in the US rather than risk leaving and being barred from returning for years.
• 📉 Before the IIRIRA, around 50% of undocumented Mexican immigrants returned to Mexico within a year, but after the law, more stayed in the US permanently.
• 🛑 Despite stronger enforcement measures, the laws did not effectively stop undocumented immigration, doubling the undocumented population to at least 10 million today.
• 🧠 Views on immigration have shifted, with most Americans now seeing immigrants as a strength, but the outdated laws remain unchanged, showing that enforcement alone cannot solve the issue.

Q & A

What was the general public sentiment in the early 1990s regarding immigration?

In the early 1990s, most Americans saw immigrants as a burden on the country, believing they took jobs, housing, and healthcare. Many thought immigration as a whole should be decreased.

How did the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 aim to address undocumented immigration?

IIRIRA aimed to decrease the number of undocumented immigrants by expanding the reasons for deportation, increasing border enforcement, and creating severe penalties for those who had lived in the US undocumented.

What were the consequences of IIRIRA on deportations in the United States?

IIRIRA drastically expanded the list of deportable crimes, including minor infractions, and made deportation more automatic, leading to a significant increase in deportations, even for lawful immigrants.

How did undocumented immigration patterns change after the passing of IIRIRA?

Before IIRIRA, many undocumented immigrants, particularly from Mexico, frequently returned to their home countries. After IIRIRA, stricter enforcement and penalties led to more immigrants staying in the US permanently, contributing to a rise in the undocumented population.

What are the 3 and 10-year bars created by IIRIRA, and how do they affect immigrants seeking legal status?

The 3 and 10-year bars penalize undocumented immigrants who leave the US by preventing them from returning for 3 or 10 years, depending on the length of their undocumented stay. This has made it nearly impossible for many to obtain legal status.

How did IIRIRA change the legal pathways for undocumented immigrants to obtain lawful status?

Before IIRIRA, undocumented immigrants could often legalize their status through marriage, family sponsorship, or employment. After IIRIRA, these pathways became harder to access due to the 3 and 10-year bars, which require immigrants to leave the country and face long bans before applying for lawful status.

What impact did IIRIRA have on immigrant families in the United States?

IIRIRA’s harsh penalties, including the 3 and 10-year bars, led to family separations, as immigrants seeking legal status had to leave the US, often for many years, leaving behind children, spouses, or other family members.

How did IIRIRA influence the future of immigration enforcement, especially after 9/11?

IIRIRA set the groundwork for future immigration laws that expanded the reasons for deportation, especially after 9/11, further entrenching the focus on immigration enforcement as a deterrent.

What did IIRIRA demonstrate about the effectiveness of deterrence-based immigration policies?

IIRIRA demonstrated that deterrence-based policies, such as stricter deportations and penalties, did not stop undocumented immigration. Instead, they incentivized people to stay in the US permanently and increased the undocumented population.

How have public attitudes toward immigrants changed since the 1990s, and how does that contrast with the laws created during that time?

Today, most Americans view immigrants as a strength rather than a burden, unlike in the 1990s. However, the laws created during that period, such as IIRIRA, have not changed and continue to impose outdated standards and harsh penalties on immigrant populations.

Outlines

00:00

📉 The Impact of 1990s Immigration Policies

The paragraph outlines the contentious immigration debate in the early 1990s, where Americans were concerned about undocumented immigrants being a burden on resources like jobs, housing, and healthcare. It discusses the political climate, with Republicans pushing a tough stance on immigration and Democrats following suit. The highlight is the passage of the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), aimed at curbing undocumented immigration but which had the opposite effect. Prior to IIRIRA, undocumented immigration was often temporary, with individuals moving back and forth across the border for seasonal work. IIRIRA, however, expanded deportable offenses to include minor infractions, made these deportations automatic, and even applied them retroactively. This led to a surge in deportations, harming families and U.S. citizen children. The law also introduced the 3 and 10-year bars, which imposed severe penalties for undocumented individuals seeking legal status, effectively deterring them from leaving the U.S. The result was an increase in undocumented populations, as people stayed rather than risk separation from their families.

05:02

🔄 Outdated and Ineffective Immigration Strategies

The paragraph critiques the 1996 immigration laws for being outdated and ineffective in addressing the realities of modern immigration needs. It argues that the punitive measures, such as building higher walls or increasing enforcement, fail to address the root causes of immigration and have proven to be inadequate deterrents. Instead, the focus should shift to adapting policies that reflect current needs, as the current approach has led to unintended consequences and prolonged the challenges of undocumented immigration.

Keywords

💡Immigration

Immigration refers to the movement of individuals from one country to another, typically in search of better economic opportunities or for other personal reasons. In the video, immigration is central to the discussion, focusing on the debate in the 1990s about whether it was beneficial or detrimental to America. The issue of undocumented immigration and its impact on jobs, housing, and healthcare is highlighted.

💡Undocumented Immigrants

Undocumented immigrants are individuals who enter or stay in a country without official legal permission. The video explains how, by the early 1990s, there were approximately 5 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S., and public opinion viewed them as a burden. The term also relates to how U.S. immigration laws evolved to punish and deter undocumented immigrants through stricter policies.

💡Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA)

The IIRIRA was a major piece of legislation passed in 1996 under President Bill Clinton. It aimed to reduce the number of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. but instead resulted in harsher immigration enforcement and increased deportations. The video explores how IIRIRA expanded the list of deportable crimes and implemented strict bars on re-entry for immigrants seeking legal status.

💡Deportation

Deportation is the forced removal of an individual from a country for violating immigration laws. In the video, the expansion of deportable offenses under IIRIRA is emphasized, including minor infractions that previously would not have led to deportation. This shift in policy dramatically increased the number of people deported from the U.S., including those with lawful status.

💡3 and 10 Year Bars

These bars were provisions in the IIRIRA that prevented undocumented immigrants from re-entering the U.S. for 3 or 10 years, depending on the duration of their unlawful stay. The video explains how these bars made it nearly impossible for immigrants to gain legal status, as they would need to leave the country and face long periods of separation from their families.

💡Family Separation

Family separation refers to the forced separation of family members due to immigration enforcement, such as deportation or the application of the 3 and 10 year bars. The video describes these policies as a form of family separation, as many immigrants were forced to choose between staying in the U.S. undocumented or leaving and being separated from their loved ones for years.

💡Retroactive Deportation

Retroactive deportation refers to the deportation of immigrants based on past offenses that were not previously grounds for deportation. The video highlights how IIRIRA allowed for the deportation of individuals for minor infractions committed long before the law was passed, even if they had not committed any crimes since.

💡Tough-on-Immigration

Tough-on-immigration refers to political platforms and policies that advocate for stricter immigration laws and increased enforcement to reduce the number of immigrants, particularly undocumented ones. The video discusses how this approach was adopted by Republicans in the 1990s and influenced the passage of laws like IIRIRA, which aimed to deter immigration but had unintended consequences.

💡Temporary Migration

Temporary migration refers to the movement of individuals to another country for a limited period, often for work. Before the passage of IIRIRA, undocumented immigrants from Mexico would often migrate temporarily to the U.S. for seasonal work and then return to Mexico. The video explains how stricter immigration laws made this pattern less common, as immigrants began to stay in the U.S. permanently to avoid the risk of not being allowed back.

💡Immigration Enforcement as Deterrence

This concept refers to the idea that stronger enforcement of immigration laws will deter people from migrating illegally. The video critiques this approach, arguing that despite harsher penalties and increased deportations, undocumented immigration continued to rise. It suggests that deterrence-based policies do not address the root causes of immigration and often have counterproductive effects.

Highlights

In the early 1990s, immigration became a highly contentious issue in the United States.

By the mid-1990s, there were approximately 5 million undocumented immigrants in the US, and most Americans saw them as a burden.

In 1996, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) was signed into law with the goal of decreasing undocumented immigration.

Before the 1990s, undocumented immigration was often temporary, with many immigrants returning to their home countries after working in the US.

IIRIRA expanded the list of deportable crimes to include minor infractions like shoplifting and made these offenses retroactive.

After IIRIRA, even lawful immigrants could be deported for minor crimes committed decades earlier.

IIRIRA created '3 and 10 year bars' that made it extremely difficult for undocumented immigrants to obtain legal status.

Under the '3 and 10 year bars,' undocumented immigrants must leave the US to apply for legal status, often facing long-term bans from returning.

These punitive measures incentivized undocumented immigrants to stay in the US rather than leave.

Before IIRIRA, about 50% of undocumented Mexican immigrants returned to Mexico within a year. After IIRIRA, more stayed in the US.

The number of undocumented immigrants in the US has more than doubled since IIRIRA, from 5 million to at least 10 million.

IIRIRA established the foundation for stricter deportation laws, which intensified after the events of 9/11.

Today, public opinion on immigration has shifted, with most Americans now seeing immigrants as a strength rather than a burden.

Despite changing views on immigration, the laws created in the 1990s, like IIRIRA, have not been updated.

Stronger enforcement and deterrent-based immigration policies have not stopped undocumented immigration, demonstrating the limitations of such approaches.

Transcripts

When Americans turned on their TVs in the early 1990s, one contentious issue was hard

to miss: immigration.

Is immigration good for America?

The federal government won't stop them at the border.

You spend $5.5 billion a year to support them.

There’s a right way. And there’s a wrong way.

At the time, there were around 5 million undocumented immigrants in the US.

And most Americans saw immigrants as a burden on the country,

taking jobs, housing and healthcare,

and thought immigration as a whole should be decreased.

Our country is invaded by immigrants who are like cancer cells.

That same year, Republicans ran on a tough-on-immigration platform

and took control of Congress.

Democrats were pushed to adopt tough positions on immigration, too.

We are a nation of immigrants.

But we are also a nation of laws.

In 1996, President Bill Clinton signed a major piece of legislation:

the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act,

or, IIRIRA.

It’s goal was to decrease the number of undocumented immigrants.

It did the opposite.

Before the 1990s, undocumented immigration into the US looked very different.

For one, it was usually temporary.

People used to go back and forth across the border.

They would go north for the harvest, and they would earn some money,

and they would go back to Mexico.

And if they wanted to come live permanently in the US,

there were a few legal channels, but not many.

If they married an American citizen, they could get lawful status.

Or if maybe their brother was a citizen already, he could sponsor them.

Or an employer could.

And these could be done after they were already living in the US undocumented.

Before 1996, the threat of deportation was relatively low.

People were commonly deported for committing a crime.

And it was usually limited to major crimes — like murder or trafficking.

But IIRIRA, together with other 1996 laws, drastically expanded deportable crimes

to even minor infractions, like shoplifting.

It was also retroactive.

So say it’s 1976, and someone is caught stealing some albums from the mall —

they wouldn’t be deported.

Over the next 20 years, they never commit another crime.

But after 1996, they could be deported because of that old misdemeanor.

And not just if they were currently undocumented:

this applied to immigrants with lawful status, too.

And previously an immigration judge could decide if the deportation should even take place.

Now things were a little more automatic.

Ignoring the fact that those deportations would be extremely

harmful to US citizen children or spouses.

Deportations skyrocketed.

And IIRIRA created the framework for future laws that further expanded

reasons people could be deported, especially after 9/11.

But IIRAIRA also made another huge, fundamental change in the US immigration system.

One of the aspects of the 1996 law that is particularly strict and I think

in many respects, inhumane, is the so-called 3 and 10 year bars.

Those 3 and 10 year bars made these legal pathways nearly impossible to obtain.

They work like this:

Anyone who’s been undocumented in the US for 6 months

and wants to gain legal status, first has to leave the country

and be barred from returning for 3 years.

If they’ve been undocumented for more than a year, they’re barred for 10 years.

So if they want to get lawful status through a job, they’d have to first leave the US,

for 10 years.

Or through their brother?

Leave, for 10 years.

Or through their spouse?

Leave, for 10 years.

It's family separation by another name.

The bars were intended to try to essentially create punishments

that were so severe to deter people essentially from coming here,

but as we’ve seen with many deterrent-based policies the practical effect is very different.

Instead, it incentivized people to stay in the US undocumented.

Before IIRIRA, Mexican immigrants who came to the US unlawfully

were about 50% likely to return to Mexico within a year.

But after 1996, more people started staying in the US.

There were around 5 million undocumented immigrants living in the US before IIRIRA.

Today, it’s at least double that.

And we are somehow surprised by that outcome.

This is of our own doing.

Laws like IIRIRA shaped the way the US focuses on immigration enforcement as a deterrent.

But really it proved that stronger enforcement doesn’t actually stop undocumented immigration.

These laws, and the politics in the 90s, didn't really change

the reasons why people come to the United States,

Today, views on immigrants are very different than they were in the 1990s:

most Americans now see them as a strength, not a burden.

But the laws created here, haven’t changed.

Requirements and standards that were created decades ago that aren’t responsive

to our needs as a nation and certainly aren’t responsive to the needs of immigrant populations.

The idea that, if we only had more guns, if we only built a higher wall,

that would solve all the problems.

I think we learned from 1996 that's not the way it works. It's not that simple.