The document discusses the impacts of current US immigration policies. It argues that the policies promote racial profiling, restrict civil liberties, and encourage unethical practices. Specifically, the policies have increased profiling of Latino and Asian communities. They also limit immigrants' access to education, healthcare, and other rights. The Trump administration has implemented policies like family separation at the border and detention of immigrant children, which have been widely condemned. Overall, the document concludes that current policies do not make America great again, but instead move away from values of inclusion and human rights.

1. Running head: Are Current Immigration Policies making
America Great Again?
1
IMMIGRAITON POLICIES 13
Are Current Immigration Policies making America Great Again?
Tamika S. Bouldin
Liberty University
HLSC 520
Abstract
The current immigration policy has come under sharp criticisms
from both the political and scholarly communities. The Trump
administration proposed an immigration policy that would
provide green cards to foreigners who comply with the
requirements associated with age, education, and English-
speaking capabilities. In the past, the United States utilized an
immigration policy that placed emphases on family
reunification and employment-oriented immigration system, and
towards a point-based system that focuses on the inclusion of
immigrants with certain specified levels of education and
employment qualifications and professional certifications. The
administration has also previously recommended the
implementation of immigration policies that deny immigrants’
entry to the United States or unlawful permanent residence if
they are likely to utilize Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutritional
Assistance Program, and other kinds of public support. The
current immigration policies are not making America great

2. again. Instead, they are causing America to move against the
values that made it great in the first place. The immigration
policies have increased racial profiling, restricted people from
practicing their liberty, and promoted unethical practices by the
U.S. government.
Impact of New Immigration Policies on Increased Racial
Profiling
The new immigration policies have promoted unfair profiling of
certain racial, cultural, and ethnic groups. Profiling of minority
ethnicities such as Latino/Latina and Asian communities has
increased significantly. The Civil Rights Act 1964 discourages
discrimination of people based on race and nationalities. The
immigration system encourages profiling because it
recommends denying green cards for immigrants who are from
non-English speaking countries. The Trump administration roots
for an immigration system that provides green cards only to
immigrants who meet the requirements that are associated with
education, age, as well as English speaking proficiencies
(Krogstad & Gonzalez-Barrera, 2018). Trump’s immigration
policies are built around developing a wall in the Mexican
border to prevent illegal immigrants; to deport all of the
estimated 12 million Mexican immigrants who are not legally
authorized to live in the United States; and to ban Syrian
refugees from entering the United States. Furthermore, the
Trump immigration policies seek to exclude all immigrants from
Islamic nations from entering the country. In so doing, the
Trump administration is encouraging a race/ discrimination
based immigration system (Schmidt, 2019). Consequently,

3. critics of the existing immigration policy have raised
complaints that such views contravene the nation’s previous
views of welcoming immigrants and visitors from different
racial, cultural, and religious backgrounds from entering the
country.
Historical assessments show that form the start, racism and
xenophobia have been driving forces behind immigration laws
in the country. An understanding of immigration policies in the
country requires a critical assessment of the history of racial
exclusion and inequality. Immigration laws and racial, ethnic
and religious discrimination the country can be viewed as
opposite sides of the same coin (Oppenheimer, Prakash &
Burns, 2016). From the establishment of the Republic, the
American immigration policies have represented racial ideals
with respect to several and changing racial, ethnic, and religious
minority groups (Pham & Van, 2019). In 1790, the first
Congress established the he first naturalization laws, which
provided citizenship to any ‘free white person’ of good moral
character. Trump’s immigration policies seem to mirror the first
immigration law. Thereafter, the American immigration
legislations have sought, with varying success, to exclude the
disfavored communities of each era, usually by defining such
groups in racial light. In all such efforts, the ‘undesired’ ones
continue to set foot on the American soil. For the most part,
foreigners who immigrated on their own were largely
assimilated (especially Europeans), or integrated into the
American social system (as is the case with still-racialized
Asians, Africans, and Latin Americans) (Oppenheimer, Prakash
& Burns, 2016). The notable exceptions for the assimilation or
integration of immigrant groups are the descendants of
Africans, who were forcibly transferred to the New World and
held bondage for more than four centuries, and who continue to
face significant hurdles in terms of racial and structural barriers
to integration.
Currently, the immigration policies have increased anti-
immigrant hysteria, which has been as high as it had been in the

4. American history. The hostility against immigrants is directed
largely at immigrants from Mexico, and increasingly at
foreigners from Islamic nations, Africans, as well as South Asia
(Oppenheimer, Prakash & Burns, 2016). One issue that
dominates debates on immigration crisis is whether or not
Mexican immigrants will comply with the same patterns of
assimilation or integration as previous groups of immigrants, or
if they will collaborate with Black Americans as long-standing
second-class citizens. Apart from the mixed judicial
disagreement with the state policies, many social, economic,
and political factors will continue to impact whether immigrants
are eventually wholly embraced as the latest groups continue to
join the country’s racially heterogonous identity.
The Impact of The Immigration Policies on People’s Liberty
The immigration policies limit immigrants’ freedom of
movement because of the extreme limitations. The policies
threaten the citizenship by birth rights of immigrants’ children.
The U.S. constitution accords all people the freedoms that these
policies are threatening (Grover et al., 2019). One of the
misstated elements of the contemporary debate is the idea that
aliens in the country have no rights. While it is true that such
people may ultimately lack the right to live and remain in the
United States, they still have many important rights and
freedoms under the American constitution. The Supreme Court,
for instance, recently supported the view that the US
representatives serve all residents, and not merely those who are
legible or registered to vote. For instance, immigrants and
citizens alike have the right to fair treatment, which is under the
Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fifth and
Fourteenth Amendments of the American Constitution. In one of
such cases, the Supreme Court in Plyer v. Doe, the Court
determined that it was a violation of the Equal Protection
Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment for the State of Texas to
decline undocumented school-aged immigrant child the free
public education that it offers to all American citizens.
The right to education is fundamental and universal. As such,

5. all immigrants should of school-going age children should be
given the right to education and intellectual development.
According to the Supreme Court, education has a fundamental
role in the maintenance of fabric of the social system. As such,
the significant social costs that re borne by the country when
only certain select groups are denied the means to admit the
values and skills upon which the social order rests cannot be
overlooked (Franco, 2019). The right to receive free public
education does not, however, precede to higher education for
immigrants according to the current immigration policies. In
many states, undocumented high school graduates face hurdles
in securing their admission to institutions of higher learning
since they are required to pay nonresident tuition, and are
denied access to the most important scholarship programs or
other kinds of financial support. Interestingly, the unlawful
presence should not relieve a person from conforming to local
civil and criminal laws. As such, an undocumented couple from
Asia, who search desire to marry in the state of New York, must
comply with the New York laws, and not the Asian laws.
The right to quality and affordable access to healthcare
cuts across both citizens and undocumented immigrants. The
current immigration system denies immigrants of their rights to
health. The United States has for a long time been depicted as
the land of freedom and opportunities, a place in which the
prospective immigrants can attain prosperity and upward
mobility (Wood, 2019). However, American natives and
immigrants have voiced concerns that immigration reduces
wages and that new arrivals may fail to be assimilated into the
American social system. Furthermore, in the last twenty years,
new anti-immigration policies and legislations have surfaced to
tackle migration of undocumented foreigners (Wood, 2019). As
a result of the immensely large variations in living standards
brought by wide income inequalities between developed and
developing economies, people have been migrating to more
promised and developed regions across history. However,
access to health care services becomes a major problem for

6. undocumented immigrants. Immigration laws and policies
explicitly provide or constrain access to health services. Laws
and policies in many states still restrict rights to health services
to undocumented immigrants. Moreover, laws and policies that
provide minimum rights to health services are not clearly
defined for undocumented immigrants. In the same vein,
numerous legislations restrict immigrants from accessing basic
health care services such as emergency care (Wood, 2019).
More precisely, such policies openly state that undocumented
immigrants do not have the right to seek health care services. In
addition, the policies mandate professionals to report each
patient’s documentation status.
The current immigration policy uses ‘documentation status’ as a
means of exclusion of basic healthcare services such as HIV,
STI, and prenatal care services that are provided by government
agencies or nonprofit institutions that receive government
funding. In some jurisdictions and states, healthcare services
are only provided to undocumented immigrants who are found
in detention camps and centers. Other states have explicit
legislations and policies in which undocumented immigrants are
entitled only to emergency care or forms of care that are
specified as immediate or urgent. Nonetheless, in numerous
cases, while such services are available to undocumented
immigrants, they are hesitant to seek health care services in
health institutions to get emergency care owing to fear of
potential retaliation and deportation. While undocumented
immigrants may be entitled to emergency health services, such
services often entail administrative processes, such as the
completion of applications and forms, that when put into
practice, deterred their access to health care to a certain degree.
There is a strong direct correlation between perceived fear of
deportation and harassment from authorities and lack of
immigrants’ access to a broader range of health care services.
Immigrants often perceive immigration policies as a threat not
just to their wellbeing, but also to their families as causes of
criminalization. Additionally, in states that have explicit laws

7. the prohibit undocumented immigrants from access to health
services, institutional structures such as law enforcement
agencies and health care organizations discriminate against
undocumented immigrants. In so doing, undocumented
immigrants not only fear forced deportation, but they also feel
discriminated against and harassed by other governmental and
non-governmental institutions. Specifically, regular police
checkpoints and immigration raids serve to perpetuate the fears
of and isolation from health care services. It is also worth
noting that the clear relationship between immigration policies
and access to HIV services and care coordination services for
undocumented immigrants, including LGBT individuals. The
timely entry into HIC treatment and management is crucial for
early administration of therapy, immunological recovery, as
well as enhancing chances of survival. Nonetheless,
undocumented Latinos and blacks are more likely to enter HIV
care at later stages in the disease course (Wood, 2019). As such,
getting diagnoses of AIDS, together with the presence of anti-
immigration policies, act as big impediment to accessing
sufficient care. For instance, immigrants are commonly
threatened by anti-immigration policies and feel that such
policies prevent them from accessing HIV services, alongside
general lack of health service accessibility and lengthy
bureaucratic requirements that serve as barriers to getting care.
Promotion of Unethical Practices by the Government
The government has engaged in many questionable practices
supported by immigration policies. The policies have caused
separation of children from their parents. Many children have
been placed in concentration camps. People who know no other
home than America since birth are at risk of deportation
(Grover et al., 2019). The current immigration system has been
faulted for encouraging unethical practices by the federal
government. In 2018, the US government developed a zero
tolerance illegal immigration control approach within the US-
Mexican border, a measure that resulted in the massive
detention of all adult in readiness of federal prosecutions for

8. illegal entry into the country. The policy issued by the
government also resulted in the subsequent removal of their
children to separate child shelters across different parts of the
United States (Sager, 2018). Approximately 2300 immigrant
children and infants were separated from their parents for
immigration reasons. The media exposed scenes of families in
destitutions and desperation, which ignited international
condemnation of the American immigration policy and fresh
criticisms of the detention camps. The detention of children for
immigration reasons is a widely mentioned practice that has
been in existence for many years, despite numerous studies
indicating the existence of physical and mental harm on victims.
The Trump Administration has been criticized for engaging in
unethical behaviors that threaten the rights and wellbeing of
immigrants. Both the media and the international community
have vehemently condemned the government’s zero tolerance
immigration system, which calls for the detention and federal
prosecution of all adults that have been apprehended for illegal
entry at the US-Mexico border, such as those who are seeking
asylum. The American Constitution and other laws prohibit the
act of child detention in federal jails, the outcomes of such
parental arrests, as well as the forceful removal of
accompanying children to separate detention centers. In 2018,
approximately 2300 immigrant children, including preverbal,
breastfed infants were moved to separate child detention
shelters in different parts of the United States (Wood, 2018).
While the children awaited the outcomes of their parents’ cases,
their reunion is not guaranteed. Following a wide public outcry,
the Trump administration signed an executive order to end the
policy of separating children from their parents within the US-
Mexico border. Since the American legal system does not allow
child detention in federal jails, the outcomes of these parental
apprehensions and arrests , coupled with the forceful removal of
accompanying children to separate detention centers, amounted
to gross violation of human rights and liberty.
The United States High Commission for Refugees approximated

9. that about 50 million children have migrated across different
countries and boundaries, and have been forcefully detained or
displaced (Wood, 2018). In the US-American borders,
immigrants who are captured and detained are mainly asylum
seekers from politically unstable societies such as Guatemala,
Honduras, as well as El Savador. Such immigrants do not
deserve ill treatment by the government because they are
basically searching for asylum, peace, and stability. Moreover,
they come from critically destabilized parts of the world that
are plagued by gross and systematic violations of human rights.
Furthermore, the immigrants often face insecurities brought by
drug cartels, poverty, violence as well as corrupt criminal
justice systems. Furthermore, criminal gang groups target and
use children as tools for exploitation and control (Wood, 2018).
As such, migrating through Mexico to the United States is
similarly herculean and torturous, since immigrants report cases
of violence, kidnappings, sexual assaults, and physical abuse.
Massive cases of human trafficking takes place between the US-
Mexican border, as well as extortions and maltreatment of both
children and adult immigrants by law enforcement officials who
man the border. Refugee immigrants’ rights to access to
affordable decent housing and food are equally frustrating. For
instance, immigrants’ access to sufficient shelter, nourishment,
and medical services is hard. When immigrant children reach
the American-Mexican border, their compounding exposures to
the negative social determinants of health and summative
negative experiences put them at risks of developing mental,
physical, and developmental illnesses that could affect their
adult life.
In light of the above, there have bene widespread concerns
about increased child detention, which also takes the form of
the indiscriminate utilization of no touch rules that are designed
to deter inappropriate physical contact with law enforcers
(Wood, 2018). Although such polices have been embedded in
the criminal justice system to protect adolescents from sexual
assaults, the deprivation of young children from physical

10. comfort heightens trauma and depression (Wood, 20180. These
situations clearly heighten the risks of getting untreated,
undetected, and new forms of health problems that may threaten
their lives and mental wellbeing.
Conclusion
The new immigration policies do not make America great again.
They are a reflection of the opposite of the values that make
America great. The policies promote racial profiling,
infringement of people’s rights, and unethical practices by the
government. Additionally, the current immigration policies
encourage gross and systematic violations of human rights.
When immigrants are deprived of right to access quality and
affordable health, basic education, and decent housing, they live
as second-class human beings.
References
Demireva, N. (2019). Immigration Policy and the Shaping of US
Culture: Becoming America. By Roger White. Migration
Studies.
Franco, D. (2019). This Land Is Our Land: Exploring the Impact
of US Immigration Policies on Social Work Practice. Journal of
Progressive Human Services, 1-20.
Grover, T., Bayraktaroglu, E., Mark, G., & Rho, E. H. R.
(2019). Moral and Affective Differences in US Immigration

11. Policy Debate on Twitter. Computer Supported Cooperative
Work (CSCW), 1-39.
Krogstad, J. M., & Gonzalez-Barrera, A. (2018). Key facts
about US immigration policies and proposed changes. Pew
Research Center, 26.
Oppenheimer, D. B., Prakash, S., & Burns, R. (2016). Playing
the Trump card: The enduring
legacy of racism in immigration law. Berkeley La Raza LJ, 26,
1.
Pham, H., & Van, P. H. (2019). Subfederal Immigration
Regulation and the Trump Effect. NYUL Rev., 94, 125.
Sager, A. (2019). Towards a Moral and Political Philosophy of
Immigration. Radical Philosophy Review, 22(1), 165-170.
Schmidt, P. W. (2019). An Overview and Critique of US
Immigration and Asylum Policies in
the Trump Era. Journal on Migration and Human Security,
2331502419866203.
Wood, L. C. (2018). Impact of punitive immigration policies,
parent-child separation and child
detention on the mental health and development of children.
BMJ paediatrics open, 2(1).