1

Question 5. Roles of Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Branches Concerning Immigration

Name

Institution Affiliation

Course

Instructor name

Date
 2

Introduction

Power struggles between executives and judiciaries have been fueled by securitization

tensions, human rights, and border control over the issue of migration that is irregular. Executive

powers reconfiguration in control of boundaries and securitization has been a primary major

issue debated in the current works on border crossing and mobility. The discussions have rotated

around the immigration concept referring to illegal act employment and strategies of

enforcement of security in matters of migration. Executives have come up with new rules that are

stringent on immigration. Still, those rules become applied in their nearness, reducing the time

and space continuum to reduce judicial scrutiny and parliamentary debate. Such power

reconfiguration impacts the countrywide legal framework with the effects of inspiring principles

of human rights found internationally. Thus, there is a cyclical relationship between judiciaries

and executives on the struggle of power and migration. This cyclical relationship affects the

access of irregular migrants to human rights and justice, and hence it is of great significance.

Judicial reviews and immigration policy have got oil and water relationship. The most

illustration of this relationship is the plenary power doctrine where the supreme court has

accorded Congress explicitly unusual deference in matters that affect liens admission. The

doctrine that has insulated immigration statutes of federal from the constitutional review has led

to academic commentator's fascination.

Thesis Statement: Legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government have solved

immigration issues affecting immigrants in the United States.

 3

Border Practices

The increasing cases of undocumented people within Europe and Australia are viewed as

an issue of national security. An indication by the executive to enact local laws that prohibit

irregular migrations raised opposition from the judiciary. The court views the act as a violation

of international migration laws. The judiciary holds the mandate to ensure law reinforcement.

Creating policies that prohibit immigration by the legislature limits the judiciary as the

criminalized immigrants are protected by international laws.

The judiciary draws its power from the laws and policies while the executive comprises

political figures. The ECHR MSS 2011 instance presented a conflict. The harsh and unjust

handling of individuals who sought asylum in Greece got condemned by the human rights court.

Greek politicians used the notion of hospitality to dismiss the European Court claim. The case

revealed the conflict between the judiciary and the executive. According to moral quality belief

outlined by Becker's hierarchy, those with high ranks impose explanations and definitions about

events and facts regarding the community members. The judiciary provides a moral stand by

intervening and responding.

Immigration and Nationality

The system that monitors immigration has faced relentless attacks regarding outcome

consistency and accuracy, proceedings fairness, and acceptability. Lower courts struggle to draw

a consensus in describing nationality and immigration act. The parties involved do not only focus

on the outcome but also the process of getting the outcome. critics are fueled by procedural

shortcuts, ill-suited adjudicators, and politicization of the process. The process of hiring judiciary

judges and individuals who work in the immigration department is found to be politicized,

jeopardizing the law. A new approach is essential to depoliticize judging, control, supervision,
 4

and hiring of immigration adjudicators—the current unconsolidated review process presents

loopholes drawing conflict between the executive and judiciary.

Court and Government Judicial decision review

Court decisions regarding immigration have conditions for review. The scheme allows

individuals to request an administrative review. Judicial review is not allowed for applicants.

Lack of appeal contributes to the loss of federal court review rights. If one fails to exercise the

right for an appeal or files the appeal later than the specified time, the chances are that they lose

federal court review rights. Administrative appeals have time limits greater than or equal to the

practical judicial review limits. The law has set conditions for challenges to be presented to

federal court when: laid procedures are not observed, the decision-maker lacks jurisdiction,

unauthorized decision, incorrect law application or interpretation, bias or fraud in the process of

deciding, or lack of evidence.

Executive in Immigration

The immigration decisions in countries such as the USA influence decisions towards

national immigration goals. According to the US constitution, the president has the mandate to

ensure the faithful execution of the laws. The president has the power to issue binding policy

directives in the form of an executive order. Most of the American presidents have utilized that

mandate. President Trump, for instance, issued an executive order for immigration policies

implementation. The court still assesses that the orders are constitutional. The court checks that

the rights of the people are preserved, and clarity is checked for involved agencies to make

effective decisions. Executive orders have been criticized for their impact on the people. Most of

the orders arise from an occurrence that requires an immediate response. After the 9/11 attack,
 5

for instance, President George Bush issued Homeland Security Order which was aimed at

combating terrorism.

Over a long time, the issue of immigration has seemed as policies to be developed at the

federal level. Recently states have joined to control immigration. Some states, however, still rely

on the federal approaches, thus pushing congress for appropriate actions. Other states consider

immigration as local politics. States consider their duty with rules related to licensing, education,

employment, and state benefits. Some of the state laws remain in flux due to infringing on the

immigration duties of the federal government. The immigrants and the entire immigration rearm

get affected significantly by federal-state relations.

 6

Outline

1.Introduction

A. Explanation of the role of judicially executive and legislative in the migration

issue

B. Thesis statement

1. Outline of the main points.

2.Body

A. Support annotation one

1. executive power expansion through border practices is the judiciary

2. executives and judiciaries claim they have the lawful space and the role of

protecting communities

B Support annotation two

1. the lower court has gone through a struggle to explain nationality and

immigration act

C Support annotation three

1. The conflict has been raised between the courts and government of the judicial review

of a decision concerning migration.

D Support annotation four

1. executive action has highly increased to solve problems in the system of

immigration

2. E Support annotation five

1.high immigration flow has been helped by immigration-related legislative

resolutions.
 7

Annotated Bibliography

Marmo, M., & Giannacopoulos, M. (2017). Cycles of judicial and executive power in

irregular migration. Comparative migration studies, 5(1), 1-18.

According to this article, executive power expansion through border practices is the

judiciary whose work is to claim the law stand rule on the various matter and the effects to

protect the eroded human rights of immigrants. According to Becker's terminology, both

executives and judiciaries claim they have the lawful space and the role of protecting

communities. Thus, the executive has cut itself above other branches in the state concerning

security and protection of borders.

Legomsky, S. H. (2000). Fear and loathing in congress and the courts: Immigration and

judicial review. Immigr. & Nat'lity L. Rev., 21, 181.

This article states that the lower court, due to various cryptic reasons, has gone through a

struggle to explain the nationality and immigration act to encompass consular absolutism

doctrine that bars consular officer's judicial review decisions that deny visa applications.

Crock, M. (1996). Judicial review and part 8 of the Migration Act: Necessary reform or

overkill. Sydney L. Rev., 18, 267.

According to this article, in federal parliament, immigration controlled virtual fixation. It

raised extreme measures to ensure the government has the last say in who should or should not

remain or enter the country. In addition, the conflict has been raised between the courts and

government of the judicial review of a decision concerning migration.

Oliverio, M. (2018). The role of the executive in rulemaking: An exploration of executive

action in United States immigration law. Administrative Law Review, 70(3), 715-743.

 8

According to this article, to address more recent changes concerns migration patterns,

terrorism fears, and various refugee crises, executive action has highly increased, which can

cause instability and problem in the system of immigration. President has authority to implement

action, which gives the president executive power to ensure laws are faithful.

Filindra, A., & Kovács, M. (2012). Analyzing US state legislative resolutions on immigrants

and immigration: The role of immigration federalism. International

Migration, 50(4), 33-50.

According to this article, immigration in America traditionally was thought to be a policy

of federal-level, but recently, countries have been so vibrant in this domain. Southern border

states experiencing high immigration flow have been helped by immigration-related legislative

resolutions, which is not the same way states respond to immigration issues facing these

countries.