Photo by Nitish Meena on Unsplash "Illegal Aliens" Hurt US Workers - True or False?
Malvina, Undergraduate Student (UM-Dearborn) Imagine a world where the number of people outweighed every single job in a country. All blue-collar jobs are taken, all corporate jobs are taken, all service industry jobs, and manufacturing jobs are taken. Imagine not seeing a “now hiring” sign or not being able to find any jobs ads searching online…and it was all due to “illegal aliens” stealing US jobs. Many people may hear this statement and believe it, while others might be skeptical-and rightly so. We often hear that “illegal” aliens take jobs away from Americans, are “criminals” and don’t pay taxes. Yet, is any of this true? Did people just make this up? Do “illegal aliens hurt US workers?” Some may say “well, if there are more foreigners here to work, the fewer jobs there are for Americans.” They view immigrant workers as inherently creating more competition in the job market. However, this is a myth. First, most jobs verify an individual’s eligibility to work in the US as part of the hiring process, and most undocumented immigrants can’t pass this eligibility requirement. Indeed, when foreign workers are hired legally, the process is quite lengthy and involves multiple government checks to make sure there is no US worker that can perform the job, the job is valid and a skilled specialty, and finally, is needed. Second, immigrants are not a tax burden. On the whole, they actually contribute significantly to US taxes, yet are not often eligible to apply for government benefits. Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for public assistance, and even those with a valid immigration status face roadblocks to such benefits. In fact, there are rules restricting the amount and type of public assistance that immigrants with valid visas and “Green Cards” can obtain, even if legally eligible, in order to eventually naturalize. Third, most undocumented immigrants work jobs that most Americans avoid. These jobs tend to be physically demanding and pay very little (often less than minimum wage, which is, itself, illegal). These jobs offer few, if any, benefits and very limited stability. The US economy is big enough for everyone to work and all the myths associated with undocumented workers stealing jobs from US workers are just that--myths.
0 Comments
Photo by Alejandro Cartagena 🇲🇽🏳🌈 on Unsplash Ripping Apart Migrant Families
Zaineb, Undergraduate Student (UM-Dearborn) Migrant kids are crossing the border of hope and opportunity with bruised feet and only the clothes on their backs. After several days of an on-foot journey of fleeing from the country whose violence is at a peak and a decent life wasn’t attainable, they were met with systematic racism. A country that would have its President call them and their families “rapists and criminals,” a country that would not only deny them entry but would rip them apart from the only family they knew. The very family that they thought would bring them a new life would now be scattered in several across several holding cells. Children as young as eight months old would now be crying in a jail-like cage, where there were no caretakers aside from teens and not even a decent blanket to sleep on. At the very beginning of the Trump administration, President Trump signed a “zero tolerance” policy that would separate everyone crossing the border without authorization—migrants didn’t even have to have a criminal offense. This policy was put into place to “instill fear” into the families trying to migrate so that they wouldn’t even bother crossing. This was a policy that allowed the US Government to rip parents away from their children with no warning or remorse as they were to wait for their hearing to either be granted asylum or be deported. The separation of migrant children from their families affects real lives—and it is all in the hands of the US government. Time and again, our country has demonstrated that it does not view immigrants as humans, with family separation being one of the most egregious examples. The emotional, physical, and psychological health of these families has been put in jeopardy. The families that experienced separation may never get over it. On top of the terror that the US government caused with respect to this policy, there was also a total lack of accountability. Although officially short-lived, the damage done by family separation has yet to be resolved. The Trump administration did little to ensure that all those who had been separated would be reunited with their families. In fact, the US government only began reuniting separated children and families after a court ordered it to do so. Moreover, reports of family separation at the border continued through 2020. Migrants at the border deserve aid, they deserve to be with their families. If they are awaiting an immigration court hearing, they should be allowed to wait with their families. One way to help solve this problem would be to build detention facilities that are family safe and allow the children to stay with their parents. Better yet would be to pass strict policies that protect the rights of migrant children and families. In the meantime, remaining children and families that have been separated should be reunited immediately—they do not deserve to be treated as less than. References: 1. Bochenek, Michael G. (2019). “US: Family Separation Harming Children, Families. 5-year-olds Held without Adult Caregivers.” Human Rights Watch, 1-3. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/07/11/us-family-separation-harming-children-families 2. Rodhan, Maya (2018). “Here are the Facts about President Trump’s Family Separation Policy.” Time, 1-3. https://time.com/5314769/family-separation-policy-donald-trump/ 3. Southern Poverty Law Center (2020). “Family Separation under Trump administration- a timeline.” Souther Poverty Law Center, 1. https://www.splcenter.org/news/2020/06/17/family-separation-under-trump-administration-timeline#2017 Getting Out of Jail Free?
Gina Telega, M.S. in Criminology & Criminal Justice (UM-Dearborn '20) The criminalization of poverty has a long and complicated history in the United States, however, the 1970’s marked a new era in this saga. “Tough on crime” approaches, such as “three strikes” and other mandatory sentencing policies gained popularity as rehabilitative approaches to offending fell out of favor. The rhetoric and policies of the “war on drugs” solidified the connection between minorities, drugs, and crime. Over-policing low-income communities of color resulted in criminal records and costly fines for the already disadvantaged. During this time, criminal justice costs were shifted to those drawing on criminal justice services—the arrestee, the defendant, the inmate, the probationer, and parolee—regardless of their ability to pay. Criminal fines and fees, including court fees, were raised. Although the Supreme Court ruled in 1983 that individuals could not be incarcerated for their debts unless the act of not paying is “willful,” those in poverty continue to be jailed when unable to afford criminal fines, fees, and associated costs. Such recent criminalization of poverty can be understood through the lens of Focal Concerns. While structural historical explanations of the criminalization of poverty make significant contributions to our understandings of this phenomenon, they fail to account for individual and organizational level variations in criminal justice policy and practice across the United States. Focal Concerns theory allows for an integrated approach, framing criminal justice decision making as the result of both legal and extra-legal factors. Indeed, legal factors like blameworthiness of the defendant and protection of the community appear to have the most influence on the decisions of police, prosecutors, judges, and other criminal justice actors decisions. However, extralegal factors—such as age, class, and race—also play a role in criminal justice decision making. Faced with uncertainty, criminal justice actors are apt to adopt a “perceptual shorthand” to facilitate decision making, relying on stereotypes—such as viewing low-income individuals as inherently criminal. In this way, poverty functions as a “perceptual shorthand” for criminality, focusing criminal justice actors’ gaze and, thus, the exertion of state control, on the American poor. Criminal justice reform is needed to address the criminalization of poverty. For example, many defendants are incarcerated before being convicted of a crime simply because they cannot afford bail. The current bail system sidesteps the notion that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty, a notion upon which are criminal justice system is organized. Rather, defendants are only deemed “innocent enough” to await trial in the community if they can afford to do so. Dismantling the cash bail system would help alleviate injustice within criminal justice system. Criminal justice reforms, however, will not reduce implicit bias within society. The narratives, stereotypes, and tropes regarding the assumed criminality of low-income individuals are built into American society. Poverty is often perceived of as being indicative of one’s character rather than viewed as a sign of systematic oppression. The criminalization of poverty, much like every other facet of criminal justice reform, will never have a “one-size-fits-all” solution. Still, Focal Concerns theory presents a unique framework through which to understand the inner workings of the criminal justice system that could bring us one step closer to reducing injustice in the United States. References: 1. Bernard, T., & Engel, R. S. (2001). Conceptualizing Criminal Justice Theory. Justice Quarterly, 18(1), 1–30. https://doi:10.1080/07418820100094801 2. Chambliss, W. J. (1964). A Sociological Analysis of the Law of Vagrancy. Social Problems, 12(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1964.12.1.03a00070 3. Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432 (1895). 4. Dolan, K., & Carr, J. (2015). The Poor Get Prison: The Alarming Spread of the Criminalization of Poverty. Institute for Policy Studies. 5. Edelman, P. (2019). The Criminalization of Poverty and the People Who Fight Back. Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy, 26(2), 213–226. 6. Gunja, F. (2003, May). Race & the War on Drugs. American Civil Liberties Union. https://www.aclu.org/other/race-war-drugs. 7. Hagan, J. (1989). Why Is There So Little Criminal Justice Theory? Neglected Macro- and Micro-Level Links Between Organization and Power. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 26(2), 116–135. https://doi:10.1177/0022427889026002002 8. Harris, A. (2009). Attributions and Institutional Processing: How Focal Concerns Guide Decision making in the Juvenile Court. Race and Social Problems, 1(4), 243–256. https://doi:10.1007/s12552-009-9020-4 9. Higgins, G. E., Vito, G. F., & Grossi, E. L. (2012). The Impact of Race on the Police Decision to Search During a Traffic Stop: A Focal Concerns theory Perspective. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 28(2), 166–183. https:// doi:10.1177/1043986211425725 10. Morrow, W. J., Dario, L. M., & Rodriguez, N. (2015). Examining the Prevalence of a ‘Youth Discount’ in the Juvenile Justice System. Journal of Crime & Justice, 38(4), 473–490. https:// doi:10.1080/0735648X.2014.912144 11. Raphling, J. (2019, September 12). Interview: How Policing in One US City Hurts Black and Poor Communities. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/09/12/interview-how-policing-one-us-city-hurts-black-and-poor-communities. 12. Stolper, H. (2019, January 6). New Neighbors and the Over-Policing of Communities of Color. New Neighbors and the Over-Policing of Communities of Color | Community Service Society of New York. https://www.cssny.org/news/entry/New-Neighbors. 13. Vito, A. G., Higgins, G. E., Woodward Griffin, V., & Grossi, E. L. (2019). Consent searches: Understanding the role of race and what occurs during the traffic stop. Policing: An International Journal, 42(4), 611–623. https://doi:10.1108/PIJPSM-11-2018-0162 When one door closes, a window opens. Let's say farewell to Crimmigration: Student Musings on the Intersections of Immigration and Crime and say hello to the new CrimBytes student blog! This blog highlights student op eds and independent research on hot topics in crime and justice. Stay tuned!
|
Details
About
CrimBytes is a space for student musings on crime, media, and culture. ArchivesCategories |