Immigration Technology: Avoiding a Jacquerie

By: Kory Crichton

The United Nations memorialized the freedom of movement, where every human being has “the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”[1] 165 years before the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, United States President George Washington emphasized the value of immigration:

“The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations and Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.”[2] [emphasis added]

Government can establish and enforce a system that welcomes immigrants and benefit from their wealth of experience and expertise, while minimizing the associated risks. How far can a government regulate immigration before (1) encroaching upon the right to freely move, and (2) losing the innovative gains of immigration?

As is evident by the 2016 presidential elections, the merit of an immigrant group is informed by cultural values and biases. Fear and ethnocentrism are dominant values expressed on the campaign trail. These values breed hate, a perverted sense of nationalism, and a false sense of security.

The frontrunners in this election have advocated building walls—a technology of ancient times and a present day symbol of apartheid. On one side of the aisle the leading candidate voted for a discomfiting piece of legislation known as the “Secure Fence Act of 2006.”[3] The Act, amongst other provisions, called for a wall to stretch 700 miles along the Mexican border from California to Texas.[4] The other side of the aisle pledged with bombastic rhetoric: “I will build a great, great wall on our southern border and I will have Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.”[5]

Ironically, the United States’ economy is driven by “service industries, where free cross border movement of talent is increasingly important to economic health.”[6] When it comes to immigration, inflaming the passions of jingoism adversely impacts our economic prosperity and national security. Throughout history, addressing challenges with divisive values has favored faddish symbols over human progress.

In addressing the deficiencies of the U.S. Visa System, a state governor compared visas to FedEx: “You go on online and at any moment, FedEx can tell you where that package is. Yet we let people come into this country with visas, and the minute they come in, we lose track of them.”[7] Then, he offered “FedEx founder Fred Smith to come and work for the government to show U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) how to set up a system for tracking people.“[8] The suggested technology is reminiscent of the movie Eagle Eye, where the government designed a system to track people, which ultimately developed autonomous capabilities to research, study, spy upon, and attempt to kill Shia LaBeouf.[9] Designing a system to track immigrants like they are FedEx packages lends itself to abuse.

Far from these erratic suggestions proposed by petulant voices, there are reasonable proposals that offer practical solutions. In 2014, President Barack Obama issued a memo discussing five necessary steps to update the U.S. Visa System: (1) developing a cross-agency digital services team to improve user experience and adjudicative efficiency, (2) redesigning “systems with an eye towards human perspective and accessibility,” (3) establishing “a communication task force to create clearer, plain-language instructions,” (4) improving “content management”, and (5) creating “an interagency task force to enhance data collection.”[10] In contrast, this suggestion by the President promotes values that do not involve building a wall or tracking devices. Rather, they involve the recognition of the United States as a country founded and built by immigrants.

Our Southern border and the U.S. Visa System are one of many issues plaguing the current immigration process. Apartheid and invasive technologies have no place in our society. The discussion needs to be about humane solutions for resolving the difficulties of the United States’ immigration system.

In 2016, which set of values will you vote for?

 

[1] G.A. Res. 217 (III), art. 13, (Dec. 10, 1948).

[2] George Washington, “Address to the Members of the Volunteer Association of Ireland, December 2, 1783,” in John C. Fitzpatrick (ed.), The Writings of George Washington (Washington DC: Government Printing Office, 1921, vol. XXVI, p. 254.

[3] H.R. 6061, 109th Cong. (2006) (where Hillary Clinton voted “Yea,” the bill ultimately passed in the Senate, and construction of the wall has already taken place).

[4] The Secure Fence Act of 2006, Pub. L. 109-367, 120 Stat. 2638 (Oct. 26, 2006).

[5] Donald Trump, Donald Trump Presidential Announcement Full Speech 6/16/15, YouTube (June 16, 2015), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XXcPl4T55I.

[6] Kenneth J. Harder, Immigration Law, 74 Tex. B.J. 34, 35 (2011).

[7] Raul A. Reyes, Christie’s laughable FedEx solution on immigration, CNN, (Aug. 31, 2015), http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/31/opinions/reyes-chris-christie/.

[8] Id.

[9] Eagle Eye (DreamWorks Pictures 2008).

[10] The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, Modernizing & Streamlining Our Immigration System for the 21st Century, (July 15, 2015), at 5.