Bill Overview
Title: A bill to codify in statute the CDC title 42 expulsion order, which suspends the right for certain aliens to enter the United States along United States land borders, until February 1, 2025.
Description: This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security to prohibit, with certain exceptions, individuals from entering the United States through a coastal or land port of entry or a Border Patrol station near a U.S. land border. This prohibition shall not apply to a (1) U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, (2) member of the U.S. Armed Forces or the spouse and children of a member, or (3) person from a foreign country with valid travel documents arriving at a designated port of entry. This prohibition shall be in place until February 1, 2025.
Sponsors: Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals, primarily non-U.S. citizens, attempting to enter the U.S. via land borders without exceptions
Estimated Size: 0
- The bill explicitly restricts entry for certain aliens, which means non-U.S. citizens or non-lawful permanent residents without valid travel documents attempting to enter through land borders would be directly impacted.
- Individuals intending to seek asylum in the U.S. who were previously permitted to enter the U.S. while their claims were processed will also be affected as they may now face immediate expulsion.
- The restrictions apply primarily to those entering through coastal or land ports, thus directly affecting individuals from countries with land borders to the U.S., such as Mexico and Canada.
- The target population also includes migrants from Central and South America who travel through Mexico to reach the U.S. border.
- By its nature, the policy will predominantly impact migrant populations fleeing adverse conditions in their home countries.
Reasoning
- The policy targets individuals trying to cross into the U.S. from land borders without proper documentation, so the majority impacted will be non-U.S. citizens, especially asylum seekers or migrants fleeing economic or social adversity.
- The policy excludes U.S. citizens, lawful residents, military members, and certain others legally reconsidered under the U.S. system, meaning American citizens will not have direct restrictions besides indirect involvement in law enforcement or advocacy.
- Given the budget limits, the primary expenditures will cover border enforcement and processing changes.
- Impact varies depending on cultural ties, economic dependencies, and proximity to affected areas—some might experience a drastic decline in wellbeing due to family disconnection or economic interruptions. However, others within the unaffected categories will largely be unaware or unaffected.
Simulated Interviews
Border Patrol Agent (San Diego, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this policy might make our job more manageable in the short term by reducing the flow of undocumented individuals.
- However, it may lead to humanitarian concerns, as people in real need of protection might be turned away or forced into dangerous situations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Immigration Lawyer (Houston, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will severely impact asylum seekers who have legitimate claims but lack immediate documentation from their home countries.
- I anticipate an increased workload as more cases may need appeals or alternative solutions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Restaurant Owner (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While my current staff won't be directly affected, this could slow down our ability to find workers in the future, impacting business growth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Automotive Engineer (Detroit, MI)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy seems irrelevant to me personally, although I hope it is humane and fair to those it affects.
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 |
Border Farmer (Dallas, TX)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen people cross the border frequently seeking a better life; this policy might reduce those encounters but could also affect labor availability.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
College Student (El Paso, TX)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 16/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about families getting separated. It shouldn't affect me directly, but it's a concern for the community.
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 |
Political Activist (Chicago, IL)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a setback for those needing protection.
- As an advocate, I anticipate needing more resources to support affected communities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Retired (Miami, FL)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These types of restrictions can improve border security but need to be balanced with human rights.
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 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Community Health Worker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy may increase anxiety within the communities I work with, as fewer resources will be available for those entering without documents.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Agricultural Worker (Homestead, FL)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Many colleagues come from other countries, and I worry this policy might make labor shortages worse.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $600000000)
Year 2: $520000000 (Low: $410000000, High: $630000000)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Policy implementation costs include security, legal processing, and infrastructure enhancements.
- The policy may strain relations with border communities and neighboring countries.
- Potential legal challenges could arise impacting enforcement consistency.
- Indirect economic impacts could manifest in border regions reliant on trade and cross-border workforce.