How the Trump Administration’s Quota Policy Transformed Immigration Judging

Author:

BLASINGAME ELISE N.ORCID,BOYD CHRISTINA L.ORCID,CARLOS ROBERTO F.ORCID,ORNSTEIN JOSEPH T.ORCID

Abstract

The Trump administration implemented a controversial performance quota policy for immigration judges in October 2018. The policy’s political motivations were clear: to pressure immigration judges to order more immigration removals and deportations as quickly as possible. Previous attempts by U.S. presidents to control immigration judges were ineffective, but this quota policy was different because it credibly threatened judges’ job security and promotion opportunities if they failed to follow the policy. Our analysis of hundreds of thousands of judicial decisions before and after the policy’s implementation demonstrates that the quota policy successfully led immigration judges to issue more immigration removal orders (both in absentia and merits orders). The post-policy change in behavior was strongest among those judges who were less inclined, pre-policy, to issue immigration removal decisions. These findings have important implications for immigration judge independence, due process protections for noncitizens, and presidential efforts to control the federal bureaucracy.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science

Reference109 articles.

1. Chyn, Eric , and Haggag, Kareem . 2019. “Moved to Vote: The Long-Run Effects of Neighborhoods on Political Participation.” Working Paper Series, NBER. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3496490.

2. Board, Editorial . 2021. “Immigration Courts Aren’t Real Courts. Time to Change that.” New York Times, May 8. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/08/opinion/sunday/immigration-courts-trump-biden.html.

3. Osuna, Juan P . 2015. “Statement of Juan P. Osuna, Director of Executive Office for Immigration Review, United States Department of Justice.” U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. Hearing on “The 2014 Humanitarian Crisis at Our Border: A Review of the Government’s Response to Unaccompanied Minors One Year Later.” https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/imo/media/doc/Testimony-Osuna-2015-07-07.pdf.

4. Decision Making in the Hidden Judiciary: Institutions, Recruitment, and Responsiveness Among U.S. Administrative Law Judges

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3