Bill Overview
Title: Combating Deceptive Immigration Enforcement Practices Act of 2022
Description: This bill bars immigration officers or agents of the Department of Homeland Security from wearing clothing, accessories, or other items bearing the word police while performing duties under the immigration laws.
Sponsors: Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals interacting with U.S. immigration officers or agents
Estimated Size: 45000000
- The bill impacts immigration officers or agents of the Department of Homeland Security by restricting what they can wear during enforcement duties.
- Immigrants interacting with these officials will be affected, as the change in attire might influence their perceptions and interactions.
- The legislation is intended to ensure that immigrants being enforced upon are not misled into believing immigration officers are local police, potentially impacting their sense of trust and security.
- It aims to clarify roles and reduce confusion among immigrants and the general public regarding who is performing immigration versus local policing duties.
- The bill could indirectly affect law enforcement agencies by distinguishing their roles and reducing misconceptions or misidentifications.
Reasoning
- The policy impacts two primary groups: immigration officials who are required to change their attire, and immigrants who interact with these officials. For immigration officers, the impact is relatively low—requiring a change in uniform or badges is less disruptive and primarily administrative.
- For immigrants, the impact may vary based on their interactions with immigration officials. Clarifying that such officials are not police might reduce fear and increase their wellbeing, particularly among undocumented individuals or those who have had negative experiences with law enforcement.
- The budget constraints suggest that the majority of effects need to be achieved through low-cost means such as training and uniform adjustments rather than extensive outreach programs.
- Including some individuals in the simulation who are unaffected by the policy will help to provide a more comprehensive set of perspectives for assessment.
Simulated Interviews
Immigration Officer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's a small adjustment, but it could help make our role clearer.
- I don't see this impacting my day-to-day duties much.
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 |
Undocumented Immigrant (Houston, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good to know who is immigration and who is police.
- I would feel a bit safer if I knew who was who.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Community Organizer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could really help build trust, which is important in community policing.
- We often hear reports about confusion and fear, this might alleviate some of that.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Customs and Border Protection Agent (El Paso, TX)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change won't affect how I do my job, but it might clear up public confusion.
- Our work often gets misunderstood, so distinction could be beneficial.
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 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law can be reassuring that immigration is not linked to local police services.
- Makes sense for roles to be distinct so people know who they're dealing with.
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 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Local Police Officer (New York, NY)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's a smart move to prevent miscommunications for both immigration and policing duties.
- Having clear roles can reduce unnecessary tension.
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 |
Immigrant Advocate (Miami, FL)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see the benefit in ensuring immigrants aren't misled into thinking officers are local police.
- It's a small, yet potentially impactful change.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Dallas, TX)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Understanding who is ICE versus local police helps ease fears in our community.
- Distinction is key for safe and honest interactions.
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 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired Teacher (San Diego, CA)
Age: 61 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Changes like these might improve confidence and lessen fear among my students.
- Uniforms should distinctly represent the role one performs.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Software Engineer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think this would have any direct impact on me.
- Good for those who it concerns, but doesn't change much here.
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 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $8000000 (Low: $6000000, High: $10000000)
Year 2: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $2000000)
Year 3: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $2000000)
Year 5: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $2000000)
Year 10: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $2000000)
Year 100: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $2000000)
Key Considerations
- The bill is designed to address issues of role clarity and public trust in law enforcement and immigration enforcement.
- Initial costs will primarily be incurred in the first year, with very low ongoing costs thereafter.