[ad_1]<\/p>\n
Scholars and advocates address regulatory frameworks that govern immigrants without legal status.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
More than 46 million immigrants live<\/a> in the United States, the highest immigrant population in more than a century. But many immigrants lack<\/a> the legal status to work and live in the United States which subjects them to a different regulatory framework for accessing justice, health care, and housing.<\/p>\n A vast majority of immigrants who lack legal status have lived<\/a> in and contributed<\/a> to their communities for many years.<\/p>\n Although the United States reaps benefits from immigrants\u2019 contributions, the U.S. regulatory framework subjects immigrants without legal status to either overregulation\u2013\u2013as a way to prevent<\/a> their access to government resources\u2013\u2013or underregulation, as a means to allow<\/a> their continued deportation or exclusion.<\/p>\n Under the Trump Administration\u2019s 2020 public charge rule<\/a>, for example, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) explained<\/a> that \u201cindividuals are inadmissible to the United States if they are unable to care for themselves without becoming public charges.\u201d The 2020 rule deemed<\/a> immigrants without legal status a \u201cpublic charge\u201d if they relied on, or could rely on, public benefits such as Medicaid, SNAP, or federal housing assistance.<\/p>\n Even though the Trump Administration\u2019s public charge rule is no longer in effect, the rule had a lasting effect during the COVID-19 pandemic, when half of immigrant families abstained<\/a> from seeking public assistance because they feared potential consequences on their immigration status.<\/p>\n In addition, DHS has proposed<\/a> a change to the 2019 public charge rule, which would walk back the previous Administration\u2019s interpretation of \u201cpublic charge.\u201d According to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas<\/a>, under this rule change, individuals would not \u201cbe penalized<\/a> for choosing to access the health benefits and other supplemental government services available to them.\u201d Yet, DHS will continue to exclude<\/a> certain noncitizens who might need to access public benefits such as Social Security and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program.<\/p>\n DHS continues to deport<\/a> people often without a hearing before an immigration judge or access to legal counsel. Simultaneously, DHS does not get involved<\/a> in instances of privately-funded deportations, such as medical deportation, when hospitals contract private charter planes to avoid the continued medical care of immigrants without legal status or health insurance.<\/p>\n In this week\u2019s Saturday Seminar, we feature the work of experts who discuss how the administrative state differs for immigrants who lack legal status.<\/p>\n The\u00a0Saturday\u00a0Seminar\u00a0is a weekly feature that aims to put into written form the kind of\u00a0content that would be conveyed in a live\u00a0seminar\u00a0involving regulatory experts. Each week,\u00a0The Regulatory Review<\/i>\u00a0publishes a brief overview of a selected regulatory topic and then distills recent research and scholarly writing on that topic.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n