The bill, known as H.R. 3920, calls on the Secretary of Homeland Security in implementing immigration laws to target set groups of people for departure (deportation, in layman’s terms). The groups specified have individual traits that might introduce uncertainty to their continued US residency. Each group can be classified into one of five essential categories.
First up, it addresses those deemed “inadmissible” under certain criteria of the Immigration and Nationality Act such as severe criminal activity, security risks, or misrepresentation and concealment of facts during immigration paperwork. Next, it stats the priority for those subjected to “expedited removal”. Now, this could mean individuals that got denied entry at the airport or border or those guilty of misrepresentation.
Category three encompasses individuals deportable due to serious criminal offenses or posing a risk to national security. The fourth group opens a wider net, involving individuals that are deportable due to general criteria and have had run-ins with the legal systems such as criminal charges or convictions, false representations to government entities, abuse of public benefit schemes, and neglecting to depart the country after receiving a removal order.
And lastly, it targets individuals seen as threats to border security – those apprehended trying to make unlawful entries or those found in the country after such entries post-November 1, 2020.
The wider implications of this bill if enacted into law, would elevate the urgency for removal of these classified groups of non-citizens. Here’s where it gets interesting. The bill doesn’t just consider one’s history of crime but potential threats, attempted unlawful entry, and actions post-entry as defining elements. The part about those who simply do not comply with removal orders could be seen as a stern call towards law-and-order. In essence, the parameters, loosely, cover everything from petty offenses to serious crimes and even attempted transgressions.
And voilá, therein lies the nitty-gritty of this proposed bill. To reiterate, it’s called the “Prioritizing the Removal of Migrants Act”. It’ll be next up for scrutiny by the Committee on the Judiciary before making its way, perhaps, on to the Senate and the President’s desk for a potential signature into law.
Of course, the outcomes for industries dependent on immigrant labour or communities with substantial immigrant populations remain to be seen. The bill, if passed, could potentially cause shifts in the workforce and community dynamics. Immigration advocates and law enforcement may have differing perspectives, presenting a ripe topic for lively debate in the near future—another chapter in the ongoing narrative of the American immigration saga.
