Bill Overview
Title: Migrant Protection Protocols Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to remove certain aliens from the United States while such an alien's application for admission is pending. Specifically, if an alien arrived by land from a foreign country bordering the United States and the alien is not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to admission into the United States, DOJ must return that alien to that bordering foreign country while the alien's application for admission is pending. (Currently, DOJ may choose to detain such an alien or return the alien to the bordering foreign country while the application for admission is pending.)
Sponsors: Rep. Gimenez, Carlos A. [R-FL-26]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals awaiting immigration admission processing at US land borders
Estimated Size: 50000
- The bill affects individuals who have arrived at a land border of the US from a neighboring country and are seeking admission without being clearly admissible under current immigration criteria.
- This includes individuals from foreign countries attempting to cross into the United States from countries that share a land border, specifically Mexico and Canada.
- The bill impacts migrants who may have otherwise stayed in the US while their admission application was processed, who now would be forced to stay in the bordering country during the process.
- The legislation implies not just a procedural change but potentially affects the wellbeing of migrants by altering their physical location during a vulnerable period.
- There are significant numbers of individuals crossing into the US at land borders annually, especially from Mexico, and the bill will directly alter the processes for these individuals.
Reasoning
- The policy directly affects migrants attempting to enter the US from bordering countries, particularly those who are not immediately admissible. While the direct impact is on non-citizens, indirect impacts may be felt by those in border towns or involved in advocacy work for migrants.
- Given the budget cap of $150 million in the first year, only a limited number of case proceedings can be economically supported. This implies prioritization of cases based on clear admissibility criteria, leaving others subject to the new policy's return stipulation.
- The bill also has broader implications for processing efficiency and humanitarian efforts along the borders, where support systems and detention facility capacity may be tested.
- Estimating the self-reported wellbeing involves considering current and past wellbeing trends among migrants and adjacent communities as influenced by immigration policies.
Simulated Interviews
Immigration Legal Aid Worker (El Paso, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've always believed in helping those who need legal support during tough times.
- Should this policy pass, it could overwhelm legal support services at the border.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Border Patrol Agent (San Diego, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might increase our responsibilities and make the job more challenging.
- Dealing with returning migrants to Mexico could add strain to our operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Army Officer (Tucson, AZ)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I trust the government to secure our borders effectively.
- This should deter illegal crossings and bring order to border entries.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
University Student (Nogales, AZ)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy makes me worry about friends and family who are facing immigration hurdles.
- It's disheartening to see potential separations increase.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Immigration Lawyer (Houston, TX)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this directly affect my clients, often causing stress and fear.
- This could mean more time needed for each client's case due to added complications.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Community Volunteer (Laredo, TX)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We've long worked to support migrants in our community.
- The implementation of this policy could see families and individuals in harder situations once returned.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Software Developer (Austin, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel lucky to be in a sector that celebrates diversity and inclusion.
- This policy may limit the talent pool we can hire from, potentially affecting innovation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Rancher (Brownsville, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen firsthand the challenges and chaos at the border.
- This policy could stabilize daily routines on border areas like mine, but at a humanitarian cost.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Elementary School Teacher (San Antonio, TX)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's already tough for kids adjusting to life in the US when policies feel unpredictable.
- I'm concerned about the stray effect on our school community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired Immigration Officer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 68 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The system was already burdened before, and this measure could be a pragmatic step given current pressures.
- Migrants deserve proper processing, but it's imperative to keep systems orderly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $120000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $160000000)
Year 3: $110000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $150000000)
Year 5: $100000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $130000000)
Year 10: $90000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $120000000)
Year 100: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Key Considerations
- Impact on international relations, especially with Mexico and Canada, regarding treatment and return of aliens.
- Humanitarian considerations for the migrants placed back in potentially unsafe environments while their cases are adjudicated.
- Ensuring compliance with international human rights obligations and domestic immigration laws.
- Potential legal challenges and implications of due process for individuals removed to another country.
- Logistical management of increased caseloads and return processes.