Bill Overview
Title: Asylum Accountability Act
Description: This bill permanently bars a non-U.S. national ( alien under federal law) from receiving certain immigration-related relief if that individual is ordered removed from the United States after failing to appear at a removal proceeding, unless that failure to appear is due to exceptional circumstances. (Currently, this bar from relief is for 10 years.) Under this bill, such an individual shall be permanently barred from receiving discretionary relief under specified immigration provisions, such as (1) cancellation of removal and adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, (2) being allowed to voluntarily depart from the United States, or (3) being allowed to change from one nonimmigrant classification to another.
Sponsors: Sen. Tillis, Thomas [R-NC]
Target Audience
Population: Non-U.S. nationals involved in U.S. removal proceedings
Estimated Size: 50000
- The bill impacts individuals who are non-U.S. nationals and are subject to removal proceedings.
- The individuals affected are those who fail to appear at their removal proceedings without exceptional circumstances.
- This bill changes the current law from a 10-year bar on receiving immigration relief to a permanent bar, hence increasing the severity of the consequence.
- Non-U.S. nationals hoping for immigration relief or benefits may have their status changed or be deported permanently if they miss their removal proceedings.
- The global impact includes any individuals globally who are eligible for U.S. asylum and are involved in U.S. immigration proceedings.
Reasoning
- The Asylum Accountability Act affects non-U.S. nationals, specifically those who may fail to appear at their removal proceedings. It's important to include a diverse group within this population to understand the policy's reach. These people generally fall under low to medium socio-economic status due to their precarious legal status.
- The policy effectively increases the penalty for missing a court date, causing those who might otherwise return for proceedings to potentially forever lose their opportunity to stay legally. This could have a psychological impact, increasing stress and lowering wellbeing associated with legal uncertainties.
- The population affected by this policy could include a significant proportion of individuals seeking asylum. These people endure high-stress situations, and their wellbeing is likely to be critically influenced by the legal environment. That said, the numbers given for funding reflect a conservative approach, considering the potential financial and logistical costs of identifying and pursuing individuals under the new legal requirement.
- The impact on U.S. citizens is indirect but important to note, particularly within families where some members may have non-U.S. national status.
Simulated Interviews
Factory Worker (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I am scared of missing my court date because I could lose everything.
- This new law makes it harder for people like me to try again in case something happens beyond our control.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 4 |
Waitress (Houston, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law is too harsh. People miss court for legitimate reasons sometimes.
- I need more flexibility, not less, because I'm trying to provide for my kids.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 1 | 4 |
Student (New York City, NY)
Age: 19 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's like putting us on a permanent punishment row.
- I want to finish my education and contribute.
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 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Self-employed (Miami, FL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The law ignores the realities we face.
- I fear for my family's future with permanent bans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 4 |
Construction Worker (Chicago, IL)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Many of us lose paperwork due to fear and displacement; this rule is too unforgiving.
- An opportunity missed can mean my family suffers endlessly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 1 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 1 | 2 |
Caregiver (Seattle, WA)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My family's lives are precarious due to this.
- The permanent bar is too extreme.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 3 |
Landscaper (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Complexities in the system make it easy to miss important dates; this law is too punishing.
- It makes me anxious about what will happen if I miss a letter or message.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 1 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 1 | 2 |
Domestic Worker (Dallas, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've always worried about attending court on time; this makes it more stressful.
- It's unbearable to be permanently barred with one mistake.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 2 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 2 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 2 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 1 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 1 | 2 |
Tech Support (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 26 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law doesn't affect me directly yet, but it makes me rethink every step of my status.
- Permanent consequences are too harsh for immutable circumstances.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 23 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm here for education, so I'm generally safe, but any hassle impacts my peace of mind.
- The level of penalty makes me uncomfortable, even though I comply with visa rules.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $145000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $195000000)
Year 3: $140000000 (Low: $85000000, High: $190000000)
Year 5: $130000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $180000000)
Year 10: $120000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $170000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $30000000, High: $70000000)
Key Considerations
- The increase in administrative tasks and potential court challenges could strain the existing immigration court system.
- Expulsion of individuals could have humanitarian implications and affect U.S. international relations.
- Implementation may necessitate expanded awareness campaigns to inform affected individuals about procedural changes.
- Overall costs and savings may adjust depending on court rulings or amendments to eligibility criteria for exceptional circumstances.