Bill Overview
Title: Real Courts, Rule of Law Act of 2022
Description: This bill establishes the U.S. Immigration Courts, a system of courts to be independent of the executive branch. The bill also transfers all functions of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) to the Immigration Courts, with some exceptions. (Currently, the EOIR, located in the Department of Justice, has authority to adjudicate immigration cases.) The trial division of the Immigration Courts shall have jurisdiction over various immigration-related matters, including (1) removal proceedings, (2) reviews of rescissions of lawful permanent resident status, and (3) reviews of credible fear determinations in applications for refugee status. The appellate division shall have jurisdiction over appeals of decisions by the trial division and certain Department of Homeland Security determinations. The bill establishes various requirements and authorities relating to the Immigration Courts, including qualifications, length of term in office, and mandatory retirement age for judges. Each appellate division judge must be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, and the appellate division shall appoint the trial division judges.
Sponsors: Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-19]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals engaged in or subject to U.S. immigration proceedings
Estimated Size: 25000000
- The bill affects the entire U.S. immigration system by establishing independent U.S. Immigration Courts, potentially affecting every individual with immigration status issues in the U.S.
- Individuals undergoing removal proceedings will be directly impacted as the new courts will have jurisdiction over these procedures.
- Approximately 45 million immigrants in the U.S. could be impacted, as any immigration-related legal proceedings they face would now be under this new court system.
- Appointments and qualifications of immigration judges will change, affecting the judiciary personnel involved.
Reasoning
- The U.S. Immigration Courts will directly affect immigrants involved in legal proceedings. These include removal proceedings, appeals, and reviews of immigration status decisions.
- Americans with immigrant family members, colleagues, or friends might indirectly experience changes due to stress or relief felt by these individuals as immigration proceedings become more predictable or consistent.
- Judiciary personnel and lawyers in the field of immigration will directly be affected because of changes in structure and procedure, which may impact their job roles or responsibilities.
- The policy’s budget suggests it is relatively small compared to the entire U.S. budget but significant in restructuring the immigration court system. This implies careful resource allocation, making efficiency and reform of existing procedures critical.
- The independent nature of the court is designed to provide fairness, impacting well-being scores based on perceptions of justice and due process.
- Providing a streamlined and predictable process for immigration cases might improve mental health and stability for immigrants involved in the system.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (San Diego, CA)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel optimistic about the policy now that immigration decisions might be more consistent.
- Having an independent court could mean less political influence in important decisions affecting people like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Immigration Lawyer (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy could add some stability and fairness into the immigration process, which can be beneficial for my clients.
- I'm apprehensive about how these structural changes might affect my work; adjustment periods can be tough.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
University Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It would be reassuring to have an independent court potentially influencing visa or residency decisions, ensuring they are fair.
- I hope this policy will make the process more transparent when I apply for work authorization.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Restaurant Manager (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- An independent immigration court might support my family better through fair process, reducing their stress, which affects me too.
- This could allow my family peace of mind - no longer worrying about sudden changes in immigration laws.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Federal Judge (New York, NY)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The creation of independent courts might help reduce docket backlogs, though it will depend on resource allocations.
- We need to ensure these changes improve efficiency without sacrificing due process.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Community Organizer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A new court system could be a positive move, ensuring immigrant cases are handled fairly and promptly.
- There's hope this reduces bias, but implementation needs monitoring to confirm efficiency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm cautiously optimistic about the policy bringing more fairness to those I've worked with through the support group.
- I can only hope this frees them from constant stress surrounding their legal status.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Undocumented Worker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm scared but also hopeful that independent courts might give people like me a fair chance to regularize our status.
- Doubtful about quick changes, but the promise of fairness is uplifting.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Tech Entrepreneur (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Streamlined and independent court systems can prevent disruptions in hiring and employee retention over visa issues.
- This change might provide more predictability in managing workforce and international talents.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
High School Teacher (El Paso, TX)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- An independent court might provide current and future educators with better examples of how the justice system operates fairly.
- I will observe how this policy affects families in my community closely.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $600000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $700000000)
Year 2: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 3: $450000000 (Low: $350000000, High: $550000000)
Year 5: $400000000 (Low: $300000000, High: $500000000)
Year 10: $300000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $400000000)
Year 100: $250000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $350000000)
Key Considerations
- The effectiveness of changes in the legal system may vary based on judicial policy and administrative efficiency.
- Dependence on appointments that require Senate confirmation could introduce delays and additional costs.
- The long-term savings from increased court efficiency might offset some initial costs.