Bill Overview
Title: Sarah's Law
Description: This bill requires U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to detain an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States and has been charged with a crime that resulted in the death or serious bodily injury of another person. ICE shall make reasonable efforts to obtain information about the identity of any victims of the crimes for which such alien was charged or convicted. ICE shall provide the victim, or a relative or guardian of a deceased victim, with information about such alien, including name, date of birth, nationality, immigration status, criminal history, and a description of any related removal efforts.
Sponsors: Sen. Ernst, Joni [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: Unauthorized immigrants involved in serious crimes in the US
Estimated Size: 30000
- The bill focuses on aliens unlawfully present in the United States who have been charged with serious crimes, notably those involving death or serious injury.
- The global population of unauthorized immigrants is estimated to be around 11 million; however, the subset involved in crimes resulting in death or serious injury is much smaller.
- This bill directly affects this subset and indirectly impacts their family and support structures.
- Families of victims of crimes committed by these aliens will also be indirectly impacted by gaining access to information about the perpetrator.
- The global immigrant population (both documented and undocumented) is estimated to be around 281 million individuals worldwide.
Reasoning
- The policy targets a specific subset of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S., particularly those involved in serious crimes. Although the overall population of unauthorized immigrants is significant, those charged with crimes leading to death or serious injury is considerably smaller.
- The impact of the policy will not be uniformly distributed across all unauthorized immigrants, as only a fraction will meet the criteria set out by the legislation.
- Victims and their families will experience a direct impact from the policy through access to information about the perpetrators, potentially affecting their wellbeing.
- Given the policy's focus on serious crimes, its implementation will require significant resources for enforcement and communication, yet it must stay within specified budget constraints.
- Interviews will reflect a range of experiences, from those directly affected by the policy to individuals not impacted.
Simulated Interviews
Warehouse Manager (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's important to address crime, but it's also crucial to handle these cases respectfully and fairly.
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 |
Nurse (Houston, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy gives me some peace knowing I'll have access to information about the person who harmed my family.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Immigration Lawyer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry this policy could stir fear among immigrant communities and doesn't address the root causes of crime.
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 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Graduate Student (New York, NY)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Policies like this might help in individual cases, but broader reforms are needed for long-term change.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
School Principal (Chicago, IL)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the policy doesn't divide our communities further. We need to work together to find solutions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Restaurant Owner (Miami, FL)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While ensuring safety is crucial, this could create fear among my employees, affecting their work and my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Tech Consultant (Seattle, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm glad to see a focus on serious crimes, but it's crucial that it's implemented fairly and doesn't fuel prejudice.
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 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Retired Police Officer (Boston, MA)
Age: 63 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a step in the right direction for protecting our communities and giving victims a sense of closure.
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 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Software Developer (Charlotte, NC)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We should focus on comprehensive reform rather than piecemeal policies. But realistically, this could help in certain cases.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Student Activist (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 22 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I fear this could lead to further stigmatization of immigrants, which doesn't solve the underlying issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $125000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $150000000)
Year 2: $128000000 (Low: $95000000, High: $160000000)
Year 3: $131000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $165000000)
Year 5: $135000000 (Low: $105000000, High: $175000000)
Year 10: $142000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $185000000)
Year 100: $180000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $230000000)
Key Considerations
- The subset of the immigrant population targeted by this bill is relatively small, consisting of those charged with serious crimes.
- Significant investments may be required to ensure that the flow of information to victims and their families is secure and efficient.
- Any increase in detention might lead to costly legal challenges or require adjustments in law enforcement procedures.
- Funding and resource allocation towards ICE and local law enforcement may need reprioritization to support this policy.