Bill Overview
Title: WISE Act of 2022
Description: This bill addresses immigration-related issues for victims of domestic violence and other crimes. For example, the bill (1) extends the period of admission into the United States for certain spouses or children who derive their immigration status from an individual who is abusing the spouse or child; and (2) establishes a presumption that an individual with certain pending applications, such as for a visa for a victim of human trafficking or certain other crimes, should be released from immigration detention without conditions.
Sponsors: Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7]
Target Audience
Population: Immigrants in the United States who are victims of domestic violence or other crimes
Estimated Size: 300000
- The WISE Act of 2022 impacts immigrants who are victims of domestic violence and other crimes.
- The bill provides specific protections for spouses and children abused by someone from whom they derive immigration status.
- There are provisions concerning immigration detention, specifically for those with pending applications like the U visa and T visa, which include victims of human trafficking and other crimes.
- The United States has a large population of immigrants; the Pew Research Center estimates about 44 million immigrants were in the U.S. as of 2018.
- The number of immigrants who are victims of crimes or domestic violence is a subset, but the exact figure is hard to ascertain without specific crime victim statistics amongst the immigrant populations.
- The provisions may specifically affect those in difficult immigration situations, such as those in or at risk of being in detention who are applying for visas due to being crime victims.
Reasoning
- The WISE Act primarily targets immigrants facing domestic violence or other crime victimization who might be in precarious immigration situations.
- The policy introduces specific protections and accelerates processes for certain at-risk groups, which could significantly influence their wellbeing, reducing stress associated with legal uncertainty.
- Given that there are widespread immigrant communities in urban areas such as Los Angeles, New York, and Houston, the impact may therefore be more visible in these regions.
- The policy budget allows for substantial outreach, legal assistance, and support programs to facilitate smoother transitions for these immigrants, which could progressively enhance their wellbeing over time.
- Considering the target population is about 300,000 in the US, the policy aims to alleviate immediate threats of deportation and domestic violence, directly impacting and improving life satisfaction and security for this group.
Simulated Interviews
Waitress (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The fear of my immigration status being used against me by my abusive partner has always been overwhelming.
- This act can give me the chance to think about my future without living in constant fear of deportation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Construction worker (Houston, TX)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Being detained with a pending U visa has left me helpless.
- If they can release me while my application is pending, it would change my life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 2 |
Caregiver (Miami, FL)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The knowledge that I could be sent back before my case is assessed keeps me up at night.
- The policy might give me the peace of mind needed to rebuild my life here.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Student (New York, NY)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel trapped and unable to seek assistance due to my dependence on my abuser for residency.
- Extending legal protection allows independence away from harmful influences.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 10 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Retail worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Without status security, I feel my whole life is at my husband's mercy.
- The protection offered by the act can be a lifeline to safety and independence.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Taxi driver (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I haven't personally faced such issues, but it's reassuring to know the community has these supports available.
- This policy doesn’t impact me directly, but it’s important for many I know who live in fear.
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 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The possibility of leveraging my immigration status against me keeps me vulnerable.
- Increased support for crime victims may discourage such abuses and enhance my sense of security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired (Hialeah, FL)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am retired and these policies do not affect me directly, but they would have been beneficial for many I knew when they first arrived.
- Provides necessary protections for the vulnerable, even though my wellbeing stays the same.
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 |
Housekeeper (Boston, MA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 2
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having fled violence at home, I fear being sent back as a deterrent.
- This policy might ensure my safety and give me a fighting chance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 2 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
High School Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 18 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Worrying about my parents' status has caused immense stress on my studies and mental health.
- Any policy that gives them more security improves my future too.
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 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $150000000)
Year 2: $125000000 (Low: $105000000, High: $155000000)
Year 3: $130000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $160000000)
Year 5: $140000000 (Low: $115000000, High: $170000000)
Year 10: $160000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $190000000)
Year 100: $180000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $200000000)
Key Considerations
- Implementation will require coordination among federal agencies responsible for immigration and customs enforcement, legal assistance, and social services.
- The need to ensure the safety and empowerment measures effectively reach the target population, without unintended backlogs or bottlenecks in processing.
- Effectiveness in decreasing detention costs will depend on how robustly alternatives to detention, like community supervision, are rolled out.