Essay on Newly Implemented Executive Order on Immigration

Dubbed the land of opportunity and the greatest nation in the world America has had its fair share of immigration impact, some turning to be positive while others negatively affect the country. War and globalization are some of the other reasons as to why people move from their country, looking for peace and source of livelihood. America has seen refugees from Yemen, Iran, Iraq, and Somalia just to name a few. All these countries are war-torn nations forcing their citizens to look for a safe haven in other countries in the world. The real problem arises when some of the immigrants come in with a different agenda such as to build a strong drug trafficking cartel, human trafficking cartel and to cause terror to the people of the United States. The positive and negative effect of immigrants has sparked different reactions from the different regimes the US has had since the era of President Kennedy in 1961. This paper is going to shed light on the immigration newly implemented executive order, how it all started, who is affected by the order implemented and the problem behind the order.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Various presidents have come up with the solution to immigrants in the US; however, the recently anticipated order by the current president Donald Trump has been met with both positive and negative reactions from government officials and the public at large. According to Trump and his regime, the executive order is meant to protect the nation from foreign terrorist and hence the title Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United Stated (ORDER, 2017). This has sparked a debated where the order has been said to target Muslims. For the 120 days if one had a family in the named seven countries traveling to visit them would be a problem as you might not be allowed back to the US because the policy is seen to categorize every individual in these countries as a terrorist.

The new executive order specifically aimed at seven countries was signed on March 6, 2017, by President Donald Trump. The seven countries include Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, and Iran this puts the number of the affected people to be around 218 million according to word bank. Although previously Trump was quoted saying he do not want Muslims in the country, this new order is seen to affect every individual from the named countries. This is to say that no matter your religion, ethnicity, race and gender as long as you hail from the named seven countries the new implementation will affect you.

The immigration office record shows that presidents have used discretionary enforcements powers to prevent immigrants from being pushed out the country and to allow refugees to remain in the country outside the documented immigration laws. For example, the previous Obama regime saw an executive order implemented to protect the millions of unauthorized immigrants from being thrown out of the country. He is not the first president to act accordingly as he follows and departs from precedents put by his predecessors.

In the 1961many people left Cuba as the dictator president Fidel Castro had the country in turmoil. Although they were accepted in the US, not everyone was supporting them; this led to the then US President Kennedy to act by setting up a Cuban refugee program to aid in their resettlements. In early 1975, Ford and President Jimmy Carter allowed refugees from Cambodia as well as Laotian, Vietnamese to settle in the US it was estimated that around 360,000 people from Indochina were around in the country.

1980 saw about 125,000 Cubans and around 25,000 people from Haiti arrive in U.S. President Carter used some discretionary authority to let them in the country. In 1986 there was dilemma concerning spouses and children associated with newly legalized immigrants that did not have qualifications to be legal. George Bushs family fairness allowed them to stay in the country.

The immigration-newly implemented executive order has its roots from the infamous September 11, 2001, terrorist attack, where it is meant to stop people with terrorist ties from entering the United States. The action has seen several individuals with a visa in the country being tied to terrorism-related activities. The executive order was meant to the entry of foreign immigrants to the country whose purpose is to exploit the existing friendly immigration laws for spiteful purposes.

Several lawsuits were filled by various organizations to challenge this order of its legality. On January 28, 2017, NILC and partner organization challenged the order. On 30th January 2017, Washington State filed a lawsuit against President Trump concerning the order. Other notable organizations that challenge the order include, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)

There has been a similar policy for refugees. In1990, Frank Lautenberg amended the Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill to assist Jews who were moving from the Soviet Union. Lautenberg Amendment has since then been reauthorized although for different purposes (Rosenberg, 2002). For example, in 2004, the Amendment was revised, and the Specter Amendment was added to accommodate the settlement of the Bahais, Christians, and Jews fleeing Iran. The newly implemented executive order by President Donald Trump is essentially Lautenberg Amendment, but it has been extended and broadens for it to apply in the seven countries as religious persecution is taking place.

Symbolic interactionism is the causation theory that seeks to explain the motivations behind peoples actions (Eisenstadt, & Giesen, 1995). There been increased anti-immigration sentiment and more and more social movements in the US. The fear of foreigners has been on the rise especially based on religion. An example the symbolic interactionism is the current rise of Islam phobia in the US. After the September 11 attacks, Muslims have been perceived as terrorist, and the newly implemented executive order does not make things better as the majority citizens of the seven countries are Muslims.

Social conflict theory describes that the competition for resources and power results in social change in the society (Meyers, 2000). Leaders fear that immigration will change the native culture of the nation as social conflict theory states.

Structural functionalism states that every society has existing structures that are set of necessary functions. Immigrants can maintain or disrupt the social cohesion of the society (Brettell, 2003). A sociologist has used structural functionalism to explain that immigrants in the US tend to socialize with people of their own kind to gain group solidarity. Thus if the government has viewed the Muslims refugees as a threat, it will do anything in their power to prevent more from entering the country and break this unifying factor.

Donald Trumps policy has been interpreted and observed to prioritize religious minorities over other refugees. As already observed the policy makes every individual from the seven countries a potential terrorist. The policy bans everybody from Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Iran, Sudan, Iraq, and Libya from entering the US because it wants to prevent the nation from terrorist attacks. The above statement can be interpreted that terrorist does come from these countries and because they are not single out from the general public, then every individual is a suspected terrorist from the seven countries.

References

Brettell, C. B. (2003). Anthropology of migration. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Eisenstadt, S. N., & Giesen, B. (1995). The construction of collective identity. European Journal of Sociology, 36(1), 72-102.

Meyers, E. (2000). Theories of international immigration policy-A comparative analysis. International Migration Review, 1245-1282.

ORDER, E. (2017). Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States.Rosenberg, V. (2002). Refugee status for Soviet Jewish immigrants to the United States. Touro L. Rev., 19, 419.

Schneider, S. L. (2008). Anti-immigrant attitudes in Europe: Outgroup size and perceived ethnic threat. European Sociological Review, 24(1), 53-67.