A joint initiative between the American Immigration Council and AILA seeks to change the playing field for immigrants facing deportation.
AILA’s Advocacy Action Center allows you to advocate for legislative and policy reforms consistent with AILA’s principles and priorities.Get Involved
The brand-new 18th edition of Kurzban's Immigration Law Sourcebook is now shipping.Order Now
Learn how to tackle challenges like finding and retaining affordable staff, working better in a hybrid or remote environment, when and how to raise fees, and much more.Register Now
AILALink puts an entire immigration law library at your fingertips! Search the AILALink database for all your practice needs—statutes, regs, case law, agency guidance, publications, and more.
AILA Doc. No. 17071235 | Dated July 12, 2017
WASHINGTON, DC - The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) strongly opposes the funding bill released by the House Appropriations Committee, which would focus on massive increases in immigration enforcement and border security and result in the deportation of thousands of undocumented people with children, family and other strong ties to the United States. These immense increases come at a time when border apprehensions have plummeted, and when both Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) were already at all-time high levels of funding.
Among other things, the House Appropriations bill would:
"Leaders in the House have caved in to President Trump's demand for billions in funding for an enormous, mean-spirited and unproductive deportation force that comes at the expense of vitally important domestic programs," said Annaluisa Padilla, AILA President. She continued, "Given the Administration's change in enforcement priorities, ICE is ripping families apart and deporting people who are contributing members of our communities. Handing over billions in taxpayer dollars for huge increases in the nation's already massive immigration detention system, funding an unnecessary and impractical wall, and adding 1,500 enforcement agents serves no rational purpose and is an abrogation of Congress's duty to the American people to spend their money wisely."
Benjamin Johnson, AILA Executive Director noted, "The funding demanded by the Trump Administration, which the committee just rubberstamped, is not based on actual border or interior needs. This budget would mean an increase of $2.2 billion in enforcement funding for ICE and CBP over FY2017 enacted levels, despite the fact that, overall, border apprehensions have declined steadily over the past two decades and are even down by 68 percent since October of 2016. At a time when America's reputation in the world is being shaken to its core, Congress should not help fulfill a campaign promise based on nothing but fear. It is reprehensible that House appropriators are supporting a mass deportation force when the vast majority, 90%, of the American public support permanent legal status for the undocumented. We need immigration laws that hew to our values and increase our shared prosperity. Our country deserves better than an indiscriminate and inhumane enforcement strategy."
More information can be found in AILA's report published in April, 2017: President Trump's Massive Enforcement Plan: Wasteful and Ineffective.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association is the national association of immigration lawyers established to promote justice, advocate for fair and reasonable immigration law and policy, advance the quality of immigration and nationality law and practice, and enhance the professional development of its members.
Cite as AILA Doc. No. 17071235.
American Immigration Lawyers Association
1331 G Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Copyright © 1993-
American Immigration Lawyers Association.
AILA.org should not be relied upon as the exclusive source for your legal research. Nothing on AILA.org constitutes legal advice, and information on AILA.org is not a substitute for independent legal advice based on a thorough review and analysis of the facts of each individual case, and independent research based on statutory and regulatory authorities, case law, policy guidance, and for procedural issues, federal government websites.