Crimmigration: Criminal & Immigration Law Convergence

• Crimmigration is the convergence of criminal law and immigration law
• This convergence blurs the boundaries between the two areas and leads to immigration enforcement adopting punitive criminal law measures
• Non-citizens may face criminal penalties for immigration-related offenses as a result of crimmigration

Aspects of Crimmigration

• Criminal offenses can lead to immigration penalties, such as deportation or inadmissibility
• Immigration violations can result in criminal penalties, such as imprisonment for unauthorized reentry after deportation
• Local criminal justice systems increasingly facilitate immigration enforcement by collaborating with federal authorities
• "Leviathan" describes crimmigration, which emphasizes how the fusion of criminal and immigration law creates a powerful system that can engulf individuals

Historical Development of Crimmigration

• Immigration control evolution in the U.S. can be divided into four distinct periods

Era of State and Local Control (pre-1870s)

• Individual states and localities had authority over immigration matters
• Policies varied widely
• Some states enacted restrictive measures targeting specific groups (e.g., the Chinese Exclusion Act).

Federal Supremacy over Immigration (1870–1900)

• The federal government asserted control over immigration and standardized policies across states
• The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 marked a significant federal intervention
• It prohibited Chinese laborers' immigration and set a precedent for future federal immigration restrictions.

Consolidation of Federal Enforcement Powers (1900–1970)

• Federal authorities expanded their enforcement capabilities by implementing stricter border controls and deportation procedures
• Operation Wetback in 1954 aimed to repatriate Mexican nationals, reflecting growing federal involvement in immigration enforcement

Rise of Crimmigration (1980s–present)

• The lines between criminal and immigration law began to blur, leading to the current era of crimmigration
• The Immigration Reform and Control Act (1986) and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (1996) criminalized immigration violations and increased penalties for related offenses

Debates and Controversies

• Throughout these periods, debates and controversies often centered on race, labor, and national security
• The Chinese Exclusion Act was driven by racial prejudices and economic fears of job competition
• Chae Chan Ping v. U.S. (1889) questioned the federal government's authority to regulate immigration and affirmed its plenary power

Governing Immigration through Crime

• "Aggravated felony" has played a pivotal role in intertwining criminal and immigration law
• The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (ADAA) introduced the term, initially encompassing severe crimes
• The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 expanded this definition to include minor offenses, such as shoplifting and simple drug possession

IIRIRA Key Changes

• Expanded the definition of Aggravated Felony to retroactively include offenses
• Implemented fast-tracked deportations for those classified as aggravated felons, reducing opportunities for legal defense
• Increased enforcement spending, by allocating substantial funds to enhance border security and interior enforcement

IIRIRA Consequences

• Limited pathways to legal status by penalizing individuals unlawfully present in the U.S. with 3- and 10-year bars
• Strengthened local-federal cooperation through Section 287(g) agreements, deputizing local officers to perform immigration enforcement functions
• IIRIRA didn't decrease undocumented immigration due to economic disparities, labor demands, and social dynamics
• Heightened border security inadvertently encouraged undocumented individuals to settle permanently due to the risk of repeated crossings

Multilayered Jurisdictional Patchwork

• The U.S. immigration system operates as a multilayered jurisdictional patchwork.
• Immigration enforcement is no longer handled exclusively by the federal government
• State and local governments play an increasing role, which leads to fragmented and inconsistent application of immigration policies across different jurisdictions

Immigration Federalism & Local-Level Immigration Policies

• The federal government still sets immigration laws but relies on state and local cooperation to enforce them
• Some localities actively participate in enforcement, and other resist and implement pro-immigrant policies like sanctuary city laws

Conflicts

• This creates conflicts between different levels of government
• Some states and localities pass restrictive immigration laws, while others provide protections for undocumented residents

State & Local Immigration Enforcement Approaches

Cooperation with Federal Immigration Enforcement

• Some states and local governments actively collaborate with federal agencies like ICE
• Mechanisms include 287(g) Agreements
• Secure Communities is a federal program where local police share fingerprint data with ICE to check for immigration violations

Resistance & Grassroots Immigration Policies

• Other states and localities reject federal immigration enforcement efforts, citing concerns about community trust, economic contributions, and ethical and human rights
• Examples of grassroots immigration policies include sanctuary policies, driver's licenses for undocumented immigrants, and restrictions on local police collaboration with ICE

Backdoor Policies & Indirect Immigration Enforcement

• Local governments may adopt indirect policies affecting immigrant communities
• These include housing codes and business licensing laws

Cross-Jurisdictional Conflicts: Case Studies

Mesa, AZ

• Conflict between city police and county sheriff over immigration enforcement:
• Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio aggressively targeted immigrants, leading to racial profiling lawsuits

New Haven, CT

• The city adopted pro-immigrant policies (e.g., municipal ID cards for undocumented residents)
• ICE retaliated with large-scale raids, arresting local immigrants

Raleigh, NC

• City police sought to limit cooperation with ICE
• The county sheriff enforced a 287(g) agreement, leading to more deportations

Conclusion

• Immigration enforcement varies widely based on local and state policies, leading to inconsistent outcomes
• Some jurisdictions act as deportation pipelines, while others provide protections through sanctuary policies
• The federal-state-local relationship in immigration remains a highly contested issue, often influenced by political changes

Crimmigration is the convergence of criminal law and immigration law. This includes criminal penalties for immigration offenses. The fusion creates a powerful system that can affect individuals.