Gael Quiroga

ENGL 1302-231

Dr. Nelson

4 March 2024

Addressing Complexities and Challenges in U.S. Immigration System

Since the birth of the United States of America, immigration has been a crucial factor in

creating this country. Many people tend to say that the U.S.A. is a country built on immigrants,

which in every way is true. According to Brookings, we are the only nation in the world with the

largest immigrant population (1). However, due to this being the case for the longest time, the

United States has had an influx of immigrants seeking shelter in the country. Immigrants from

around the world enter our country as refugees to seek a better life. According to Amnesty

International, individuals may be compelled to flee their home countries due to dangerous and

challenging circumstances (1). This includes women, children, and men who are escaping

extreme poverty, famine, violence, and war. Additionally, some people may be forced to leave

their homes due to natural disasters and climate change. Discrimination based on gender identity

or sexual orientation may also force some individuals to flee (Amnesty International 1). The

complexity of the immigration context shows that the United States immigration system has

significant flaws that urgently require comprehensive reform. This paper begins by analyzing

immigration policies to identify important problems. This paper then shifts to describe what a

comprehensive overhaul should look like and must be accomplished.

Issues with U.S Immigration Policies

To begin with, the inadequacies in U.S. immigration policies are apparent due to the

prevalence of significant issues and challenges within the system. According to Cornell Law
 Quiroga 2

School, the United States has a federal law that states that any foreign individual currently within

the borders of the United States or who enters the country, regardless of the entry point, has a

right to seek asylum (1). This demonstrates that this is a major law that allows an influx of

immigration and shows that any immigrant can come into the country as long as they seek

asylum. However, behind these statistics are real people who often flee from dire circumstances

and seek a better life.

Another major issue with immigration policies is providing fair and efficient paths for

asylum seekers and immigrants. Hasson et al. shed light on the fact that there are gaps and areas

for growth in the immigration policies for unaccompanied undocumented children (280). This

identifies deficiencies in immigration policies for this group of children, emphasizing the need

for reform. Moreover, Hasson et al. also provide examples when he states, "Given the

complexities of childhood trauma, it is unclear if the current policy that directs how CBP agents

assess U.C. is adequate in how it addresses or does not address the intricacies of mental health

issues U.C. experience as they arrive at the U.S. border"(280). Hasson et al. have pointed out that

the policy guidelines for Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents are not sufficient in

addressing the mental health problems faced by unaccompanied undocumented children at the

U.S. border. This highlights the inadequacy of the current immigration policy in handling the

mental health issues of unaccompanied undocumented children.

Additionally, Hsin and Aptekar have discussed how the asylum system harms migrants and

their communities. It forces them to borrow money to seek asylum instead of promoting

cooperation to improve immigration solutions, contributing to global inequalities and legal

uncertainty (1196). As the analysis suggests, the expansion of opportunities within asylum law

still exists despite specific categories being regulated. Shiff supports this concept., "Scholars of
 Quiroga 3

asylum and immigration policy document how agency officials in Europe, North America, and

Australia rigidly apply ambiguous categories, closing down opportunities for individuals to claim

asylum" (Shiff 1816). Shiff emphasizes that unclear asylum categories often limit opportunities

for asylum seekers. This narrow application of vague categories by officials highlights

significant flaws in the U.S. immigration system that require comprehensive reform. Shiff's

analysis suggests that despite efforts to regulate specific categories within asylum law, there are

still expansion opportunities, which could imply an improvement in current procedures' ability to

manage asylum claims effectively (1816). There is a potential to improve the effectiveness of

current asylum procedures. By identifying the areas of improvement, policymakers can

concentrate on refining asylum policies to deal with the complexities and challenges of asylum

claims in a better way. This could include simplifying processes, defining eligibility criteria, and

ensuring enough resources are allocated to handle asylum applications efficiently and fairly. This

brings me to my next concern with the immigration system - the evaluation of asylum judgments.

Asylum Judgments

Another issue with the immigration system is the perception of deception in asylum

judgments. This is because asylum judgments are often seen as subjective, which can lead to

unfair or inaccurate asylum decisions. According to researcher Lizarraga et al., "Decision-

making in this field is of paramount importance." (Lizarraga et al. 327). The significant impact of

asylum eligibility highlights the make-or-break factor that can change a person's life. The

complexity of accurately detecting deception, as revealed by Granhag et al., is a significant

hurdle for researchers. Their findings indicate that lie detection accuracy rates often fall below

60%, a testament to the process's challenging and often inaccurate nature (30). The importance of

accurate asylum judgments cannot be overstated, as they can profoundly impact the lives of
 Quiroga 4

those involved. Therefore, detecting deception accurately is a significant obstacle for those in the

asylum decision-making process. According to Luzuriaga et al., determining eligibility for

asylum and immigration is a highly complex process filled with substantial challenges. One of

the most difficult aspects of this process is evaluating the eligibility criteria, which are rife with

indeterminacies and uncertainties. These uncertainties can create ambiguities that make it

challenging for decision-makers to make accurate and impartial decisions. This problem

highlights the inherent flaws in the immigration system, emphasizing the urgent need for

reformation to ensure that the system is fair and just for all.

Additionally, research conducted by Granhag et al. indicates that a significant proportion

of Migration Board personnel (75%) believe there are no discernible differences in gaze patterns

between individuals who lie and those who tell the truth (30). In contrast, only 41% of university

students share this view, with almost 40% believing that people who lie tend to avoid eye contact

more frequently than truthful ones (31). These findings reveal that people may interpret

deception cues differently, which can significantly impact asylum cases. Therefore, it is essential

to have standardized training and protocols for evaluating deception in asylum cases to ensure

that judgments are impartial and fair. The difficulties distinguishing truthfulness from deception

in asylum cases highlight the fundamental inadequacies of the US immigration system. The

subjective nature of asylum decisions and the challenges in accurately detecting deception

emphasize the urgent requirement for comprehensive reform. It is essential to address these

problems to ensure fairness and justice within the immigration system and protect asylum

seekers' rights. One significant problem that requires reform is the healthcare issue faced by

migrants.

Healthcare for Migrants

Along with issues with the U.S Immigration Policies and the flaws with asylum

judgment, another major concern is how immigration law enforcement affects healthcare access

for migrant populations. The flaws in asylum judgments have been well-documented, but the

effects of immigration law enforcement on healthcare have not received as much attention.

Recent data shows that hospitalizations among migrants have increased significantly, and this is

largely due to a policy implemented by CBP in 1994. The policy aimed to discourage border

crossings by creating physical barriers in urban areas, which resulted in displaced people being

forced to take more dangerous routes through the desert. These conditions expose migrants to

harsh environmental hazards during their journeys, increasing hospitalizations.

In addition to the physical risks, hospital groups and medical professionals face various

challenges when providing healthcare services within the custody of immigration and law

enforcement agencies. These challenges can be both logistical and ethical. Providing medical

care to individuals detained by these agencies presents numerous complexities and moral

dilemmas that must be navigated carefully. According to a study conducted by Wang and

colleagues, the Trump Administration implemented several stringent measures that adversely

affected immigrant communities' access to healthcare services. One of these actions was

expanding the public charge rule, which made it more challenging for these areas to receive

healthcare services. As a result, many individuals were discouraged from seeking public benefits

due to fears of jeopardizing their immigration status.

Additionally, Lamneck has highlighted that many patients requiring obstetrics-related

care are detained in the custody of CBP or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This

underscores the urgent need for medical attention for pregnant migrants who may need medical

attention while in detention. According to Wang et al., the lack of health insurance can pose
 Quiroga 6

significant challenges in accessing healthcare, including a decline in the utilization of preventive

services and ineffective management of chronic illnesses. This highlights the severe

consequences of restricted healthcare access due to the absence of health insurance, often due to

policies like the public charge rule. Individuals lacking health insurance may encounter

difficulties obtaining essential medical care, including preventive services and managing chronic

health conditions. As a result, this can lead to severe health consequences and increased

healthcare costs in the long run. The meeting of enforcing immigration law and providing

healthcare access highlights a crucial yet frequently neglected aspect of the difficulties

experienced by migrant populations. From more significant hospitalizations due to dangerous

migration routes to obstacles in obtaining healthcare services that are exacerbated by strict

policies, the impact on migrant health is significant. Addressing these problems necessitates a

comprehensive approach that prioritizes fair access to healthcare for all individuals, regardless of

their immigration status, within the framework of immigration reform.

Solutions to Address Immigration System Flaws

To address the flaws within the U.S. immigration system, several solutions can be

implemented to ensure fair and efficient processes for asylum seekers and immigrants, improve

asylum judgments, and enhance healthcare access for migrant populations.

To begin, comprehensive immigration reform is necessary to overhaul the outdated and

inadequate policies governing asylum seekers and immigrants. This reform should include

measures to streamline asylum processes, provide adequate support for unaccompanied

undocumented children, and address mental health issues faced by migrants, especially at the

U.S. border. By implementing evidence-based policies and allocating resources to support

vulnerable migrant populations, the immigration system can become more humane and effective.
 Quiroga 7

Furthermore, efforts should be made to improve the accuracy and fairness of asylum

judgments. This can be achieved through training programs for decision-makers to detect

deception cues better and evaluate asylum claims impartially. Additionally, increasing

transparency in the decision-making process and providing access to legal representation for

asylum seekers can help ensure that judgments are based on merit rather than subjective biases.

When it comes to healthcare access for migrant populations, policy changes are crucial to

remove barriers to healthcare services and ensure that all individuals, irrespective of immigration

status, have access to essential medical care. This includes reversing restrictive measures such as

the public charge rule and expanding healthcare coverage options for undocumented immigrants.

Additionally, investing in community-based healthcare initiatives and increasing resources for

medical professionals working with migrant populations can help address the unique healthcare

needs of migrants. Implementing these solutions requires political will, collaboration among

stakeholders, and a commitment to upholding the rights and dignity of all individuals within the

U.S. immigration system. By taking proactive steps to address systemic flaws and prioritize the

well-being of migrants, the United States can move towards a more just and equitable

immigration system.

Conclusion

The U.S. immigration system is complex and presents numerous challenges. There are

inadequate policies, flaws in asylum judgments, and barriers to healthcare for migrant

populations. Therefore, comprehensive reform is urgently needed to address these systemic

issues. Policymakers must prioritize fair and efficient processes for asylum seekers and

immigrants, improve the accuracy and fairness of asylum judgments, and enhance healthcare

access for migrant populations. This requires political will, stakeholder collaboration, and a
 Quiroga 8

commitment to justice and compassion. By addressing these systemic flaws, the United States

can strive towards a more just and inclusive society for all.
 Quiroga 9

Works Cited

Granhag, Par Andres, et al. “Granting Asylum or Not? Migration Board Personnel's Beliefs

about Deception.” Journal of Ethnic & Migration Studies, vol. 31, 2005, pp. 29-50.

Academic Search Complete, DOI:10.1080/1369183042000305672

Hasson, Robert G, et al. “Patchwork of promises: A critical analysis of immigration policies

for unaccompanied undocumented children in the United States.” Child & Family Social

Work, vol. 24, 2019, pp. 275-282. Academic Search Complete, DOI:10.1111/cfs.12612

Hsin, Amy, and Sofya Aptekar. “The Violence of Asylum: The Case of Undocumented

Chinese Migration to the United States.” Social Forces, vol. 100, pp. 1195-1217.

Academic Search Complete, DOI:10.1093/sf/soab032

Lamneck, Claire, et al. “Assessment of immigration law enforcement presence in a teaching

hospital along the US/Mexico border.” International Journal for Equity in Health,

vol. 22, 2023, pp. 1-12. Academic Search Complete, DOI:10.1186/s12939-023-01934-2

“Our Nation of Immigrants.” Brookings, www.brookings.edu/collection/our-nation-of-

immigrants/#:~:text=Immigration%20is%20a%20foundation%20of.

Wang, Rita Yet al. “Examining the Impact of Restrictive Federal Immigration Policies on

Healthcare Access: Perspectives from Immigrant Patients across an Urban Safety-Net

Hospital. ”Journal of Immigrant & Minority Health, vol. 24, 2022, pp. 178-187.

Academic Search Complete, DOI: 10.1007/s10903-021-01177-9

“Who Is a Refugee, a Migrant or an Asylum Seeker?” Amnesty International, 18 Sept. 2023,

www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/refugees-asylum-seekers-and-migrants/#:~:text=There
 Quiroga 10

%20are%20many%20reasons%20why%20it%20might%20be%20too%20difficult,change

%20or%20other%20natural%20disasters.

Shiff, Talia. “Regulating organizational ambiguity: unsettled screening categories and the making

of US asylum policy.” Journal of Ethnic & Migration Studies, vol. 48, 2022, pp. 1802-

1820. Academic Search Complete, DOI:10.1080/1369183X.2019.1696669

Tudor, Florin. “FINANCIAL SOLIDARITY – A STRUCTURED APPROACH TO THE

COMPLEX ISSUE OF THE MIGRATION PHENOMENON.” Contemporary Readings

in Law & Social Justice, vol. 6, 2014, pp. 210-216. Academic Search Complete.

“8 U.S. Code § 1158 - Asylum.” LII / Legal Information Institute,

www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158#:~:text=Any%20alien%20who%20is

%20physically.