Public policy process on Trump’s 2 executive orders

Save this page for later by
adding it to your bookmarks
Press Ctrl+D (Windows)
or Cmd+D (Mac OS)
Text
Sources

POLICY REGARDING SANCTUARY JURISDICTIONS

Policy Agenda

The need for this policy stems from the fact that there are about 11 million undocumented people living within the United States (Sisson, 2017). In addition, there are sanctuary jurisdictions in the country, which are cities or even municipalities such as Chicago that fail to comply with the federal immigration laws. Instead, they protect the immigrants and even refuse to hold them past their release dates. As such, Donald Trump feels that all sanctuary jurisdictions need to act in line with the Immigration and Nationality Act in a bid to enforce public safety of the Americans.

Policy Formulation

The policy concerning the sanctuary jurisdictions ought to ensure that they execute the immigration laws and hence aid in the deportation of illegal immigrants. The president directs the use of any available systems towards the compliance with immigration laws. Moreover, Donald Trump has stated that sanctuary jurisdictions that fail to comply with the immigration laws stand a chance of failing to receive Federal funds except as mandated by law (Office of the Press Secretary, 2017). The policy further points towards making sure that there is removal of aliens from the United States.

Policy Adoption

According to Epps (2017), the federal government has no right to order local officials to execute federal law. Similarly, the government should not use the threat of large funding cuts in order to coerce a state into adopting federal policies (Epps, 2017). Therefore, this may prove to be quite an issue when it comes to acceptance of Trump’s policy, which is definitely not openly acceptable by sanctuary jurisdictions that are quite many around the country. However, the benefits of the policy such as keeping the public safer as well as the need to comply with immigration laws may be the reason for adoption of the policy.

Policy Implementation

In a bid to enforce the policy regarding to sanctuary jurisdictions, the secretary of Homeland Security ought to prioritize the removal of aliens as stipulated by the Congress. This includes aliens who have been convicted of a criminal offence, engaged in fraud, misused any forum that is in connection to receiving public betterment including those that an immigration officer may see as capable of threatening public safety (Office of the Press Secretary, 2017). There shall also be hiring of about 10,000 additional immigration officers in to perform law enforcement functions (Office of the Press Secretary, 2017).

Policy Evaluation

To a huge extent, the policy will serve as a great opportunity to get rid of any removable aliens from the United States. However, doing so as a way of ensuring better public safety for the American people may not necessarily result from implementing the policy. In fact, there are much fewer crimes committed in sanctuary jurisdictions when compared to those that occur in non-sanctuary jurisdictions (Wong, 2017). Additionally, in comparison with non-sanctuary, the sanctuary jurisdictions exhibit a much higher average household income (Wong, 2017).

POLICY SUSPENDING ENTRY INTO THE US OF IMMIGRANTS AND NON-IMMIGRANTS OF DESIGNATED COUNTRIES FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER

Policy Agenda

The process of issuing visas to citizens of other countries is an essential tool in striving to detect people that would have any terrorism ties and hence prevent their entrance to the United States. There have been a number of crimes related to terrorism that have been committed by foreign nationals after legally acquiring visas to the United States. Therefore, there is need to prevent any foreign national who may have any harmful intentions towards the United States and its people from being admitted to the country.

Policy Formulation

Policy formulation begins with acknowledgement of the role of the United States in ensuring that its citizens are safe from terrorist attacks. This is in addition to preventing admission of foreign nationals who look forward to taking advantage of the U.S. immigration laws for malicious reasons. The policy therefore stipulates that there should be a suspension of the processes involved in issuing visas. This specifically applies to aliens from seven countries namely; Sudan, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen and Libya (Liptak, 2017).

Policy Adoption

The policy adoption is a specifically easy task especially because it is to the interest of the American people. Foreign nationals from the named countries have been the ones mostly affiliated to the terrorist activities and hence the need for proper scrutiny of such individuals. The Congress supports this policy and it was involved in naming the seven countries that act as a potential threat to the country.

Policy Implementation

The policy implementation will involve the implementation of Uniform Screening Standards for all immigration programs (The New York Times, 2017). This will curb the use of duplicate documents, include in-person interviews and amend the application forms to detect malicious intent (The New York Times, 2017). Moreover, the Uniform Screening Standards shall provide a mechanism of knowing whether an applicant may intend to commit crime upon entering into the United States. Suspension of the U.S. Refugee Admissions program will also occur under the mandate of the Secretary of the State for 120 days whereby there will be reviewing of application and adjudication (The New York Times, 2017).

Policy Evaluation

The policy is set to be effective in its interest of protecting American people from foreign nationals who may be a threat to national and public safety. The 90 day suspension of immigrants and non-immigrants from the seven countries from entry into the United States will provide adequate time to go over visa application process. There will also be enactment of a biometric entry-exit tracking systems for every migrant (Homeland Security, 2017).

Did you like this sample?
  1. Epps, G. (2017). Trump’s Sloppy, Unconstitutional Order on ‘Sanctuary Cities’. The Atlantic.
  2. Homeland Security, (2017). Fact Sheet: Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry To The United States. Homeland Security.
  3. Liptak, A. (2017). President Trump’s Immigration Order, Annotated. The New York Times.
  4. Office of the Press Secretary (2017). Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States. The White House.
  5. Sisson, P. (2017). Sanctuary cities: What you need to know about Trump’s executive order. Curbed.
  6. The New York Times, (2017). Full Executive Order Text: Trump’s Action Limiting Refugees Into the U.S.. The New York Times.
  7. Wong, T. K. (2017). The Effects of Sanctuary Policies on Crime and the Economy. Center for American Progress.
Find more samples:
Related topics
More samples
Related Essays