CU immigration law expert looks at changes in U.S. actions since 9/11

By Linda Myers

How have U.S. immigration actions changed since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks? What do the changes mean for Americans, and what should be done next?

Yale-Loehr

Adjunct Professor Stephen Yale-Loehr, who teaches immigration law at Cornell Law School, is co-author of a report that holds the answers, although a few of its recommendations may irk some on both sides of the political spectrum, he says.

The report, "America's Challenge: Domestic Security, Civil Liberties and National Unity After September 11," examines the U.S. government's post-Sept. 11 immigration measures from three distinct perspectives: their effectiveness in fighting terrorism; their impact on civil liberties; and their effect on America's sense of community as a nation of immigrants. Issued this summer by the Migration Policy Institute, it summarized, and can be ordered, at the MPI Web site: http://www.migrationpolicy.org. MPI is an independent, nonpartisan and nonprofit Washington, D.C., think tank.

"'America's Challenge' is the most comprehensive compilation and analysis yet of the government's post-Sept. 11 immigration measures," said Yale-Loehr. "It offers recommendations that can make us safer and still protect our civil liberties at the same time."

"The report takes both civil liberties and security needs seriously and integrates them into a single framework," said MPI co-director Demetrios Papademetriou, another co-author of the report. "Its recommendations may not please purists on either side, but they are essential if we are to move forward as a society."

The report finds that government successes in apprehending terrorists have come not from immigration actions but from international intelligence breakthroughs, information gleaned from arrests made abroad, law enforcement cooperation and interagency information-sharing. One of its conclusions: intelligence and immigration policy must work together to combat terrorism effectively.

"This is a courageous and practical report that requires serious attention by our legislators and policy-makers," said Vincent Cannistraro, former head of counter-terrorism operations and analysis at the Central Intelligence Agency and member of a blue-ribbon panel advising the authors.

The report advances an alternative policy framework that integrates immigration policy and counter-terrorism. The framework's pillars are improved intelligence, information and information-sharing; smarter border protection; vigorous, intelligence-based law enforcement; and engagement with Arab- and Muslim-American communities.

"America's Challenge" also goes well beyond the scope of the recent report by the U.S. Justice Department's inspector general regarding treatment of immigration detainees. In particular, the researchers managed to bypass government efforts to shroud its actions in secrecy and not identify the 1,200 people detained since the terrorist attacks. They succeeded in compiling information on more than 400 of the detainees, conducting interviews with lawyers and community leaders and surveying press reports.

The report's appendix contains summaries of each of those individuals. The pattern that emerges, consistent with the Justice report, shows persistent violations of due process as well as harsh law enforcement measures directed solely at males from Arab and Muslim countries. The majority had significant ties to the United States and roots in U.S. communities. More than 46 percent of those for whom relevant information was available had been in the country at least six years. Almost half had spouses, children or other family relationships in the United States.

The report also investigates the impact of current measures on U.S. Arab and Muslim communities. It finds that the government's actions have frightened and alienated Arab- and Muslim-Americans, undermining counter-terrorism goals. Programs such as special registration became a vehicle to sweep up even those with minor immigration violations. That has discouraged compliance by raising fears that deportation could be the price of participation and cooperation.

There was one positive response: "The experience of Muslim and Arab communities post-Sept. 11 is, in many ways, an impressive story of a community that first felt intimidated but has since started to assert its place in the American body politic," said report co-author Muzaffar Chishti, a Cornell Law School LL.M. graduate who is now a senior policy analyst at MPI.