Defining Admissibility and Inadmissibility

150 150 tony
  1. Defining Admissibility and Inadmissibility
    1. Impact of Immigration on the U.S.

Categories of Non-Citizens (broadly):  immigrants, and nonimmigrants (both groups are subject to passing § 212(a) grounds of inadmissibility, qualifying for admission)

Immigration Patterns: high immigration levels in 1990s → demographic effects in US

7 main source countries: Mexico, India, China, the Philippines, Vietnam, El Salvador, Cuba (45% of immigrants FY 2001)

Portes & Rumbaut: popular view of immigrants as “poor and huddled masses” inaccurate; modern immigration highly varied w/r/t source regions, education / economic status, patterns of return / assimilation

Self-selection: immigrants tend to be relatively well-educated and skilled, compared to the average in source nations

Types of immigrants: authors categorize immigrants according to occupation type

Labor migrants: more likely to be undocumented, also to return to home country; authors emphasize back-and-forth flow of manual labor immigration

Professional immigrants: whether able to practice own profession in US or turn to entrepreneurial activity instead, this group may be more affluent than US-born median; assimilation with conscious effort to retain ties to source nation / culture

Entrepreneurial immigrants: typically small-business owners, geographically dispersed in US → less visible “middlemen minorities”; generally enter US under preference categories unrelated to actual occupations (refugees, prof. workers)

Settlement patterns: development of ethnic networks → clusters in certain states

Martin & Midgley: immigration costs and benefits to US complex; economic value of an immigrant depends on factors such as age at entry to US, education level

Adult immigrants with high school education or less → net cost to US economy; more educated adult immigrants → significant net gain to US economy (in terms of services consumed vs. taxes paid)

Economic impact other than services / taxes: job growth / loss, consumer spending of immigrants → overall, immigration has a (slight) positive net economic effect on national level (costs of immigration tend to be concentrated at local / state levels)