# data[].attributes.headline
Problems that have already occurred in the U.S that the Wall will not solve

# data[].attributes.subject
Problems that have already occurred in the U.S that the Wall will not solve

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Oh, we're going to build a wall, don't worry about it," President Donald Trump told the crowd gathered to hear him at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Friday. "In fact, it's going to start soon. Way ahead of schedule. Way ahead of schedule. Way, way, way ahead of schedule. It's going to start very soon."

So much for my hopes that Trump might have abandoned his campaign pledge to build a "big, beautiful" wall on the Southern border. The president seems convinced that a 1,300-mile contraption will solve America's immigration woes. According to the executive order the president signed in late January, the wall is supposed "to prevent illegal immigration, drug and human trafficking, and acts of terrorism."

Story Continued Below

But the reality is that a wall, no matter how "big," how "beautiful," and how "ahead of schedule" Trump builds it, cannot be an effective enforcement tool. The immigration system is plagued with problems and factors that building a wall cannot fix. It might just end up making some of them worse.

Here are five problems the wall can't solve.
1. A lot of undocumented immigrants are already here.
The president implies that a border wall will keep out droves of undocumented immigrants each year. But new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) data reveals that a main source of illegal immigration into the United States are people who arrive legally then overstay their visas. DHS estimates that of the 45 million immigrants who entered the U.S. by air or by sea on tourist or business visas that expired in 2015, roughly 416,500 were still living in the country in 2016. That's excluding those who entered via land boundaries-DHS did not release that data-so, the total number of visa overstays in 2016 is likely much higher. (By comparison, between2011 and 2016, total apprehensions at the southern border ranged from 328,000 to 479,000 per year.)

There have been moves to fix the problem. Since 1996, Congress has passed seven laws mandating biometric entry-exit screening for foreign nationals, which would help track visa overstays. But due to a number of factors, both technical and financial, the system has never been enacted. Maybe Trump will have more luck. Another executive order, dated January 27, requires DHS to "expedite the completion and implementation of a biometric entry-exit tracking system for all travelers to the United States." Regardless, a new wall isn't going to do anything to help.
2. Cartels can outsmart checkpoints.
Trump seems to think that a wall can stop the flow of drugs and guns across the border. But if anything, the 650 miles of wall that already exist have made it easier on Mexican cartels to organize and control the transportation of illicit goods.

There are only a dozen-or-so official "ports of entry" along the border line. They are highly regulated and policed, but cartels much prefer to exploit their predictability and rationality than to scatter resources across open expanses of desert and river. Traffickers have carefully studied how security operates in each checkpoint, which means they can observe and instantly respond to weaknesses, such as when inspections are relaxed in order to speed upthe through-flow of traffic, or when a corrupt inspection officer with a willing blind eye comes on duty.

Cartels are clever and tactical in adjusting their behavior. Lately, they have begun smuggling weapon parts into Mexico rather than whole guns, because parts are easier to conceal and have no identification numbers, making them harder to trace.

Of course, it's likely that not all shipments will get through the checkpoints on any given day, but such losses are factored into cartel calculations,and it's still better than risking people and product in an unpredictable wilderness.
3. Terrorists aren't undocumented.
Trump has proclaimed that building a wall on the Southern border will thwart terrorists. Yetthere is no evidence that any terrorists have ever entered the U.S. through the Mexican land boundary, and the Department of Homeland Security has long held that it has "no credible intelligence to suggest terrorist organizations are actively plotting to cross the southwest border."

In fact, most terrorists active in the United States are homegrown. Since 9/11, over 80 percent of individuals who were charged with or died while engaging in jihad-related terrorist activities in this country have been U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

As for those terrorists who are foreign born, according to a list complied by Alex Nowrasteh, of 154 foreign-born people who committed or plotted terrorist attacks on U.S. soil from 1975 through 2015, only 1 was Mexican.
4. It's the economy, stupid.
The main reason people risk undocumented migration is to find work. The Mexican recession of the 1980s brought waves of undocumented immigrants into the U.S. looking for employment, but their numbers declined dramatically as Mexico's domestic economy strengthened. These days most Mexicans moving to the border intend to stay in Mexico and work in the booming local manufacturing, health care and education industries there; they have no intention of crossing into the U.S.

But the Mexican economy is now showing signs of stress. Border communities suffered much disruption since the first walls started appearing in 2006,including the environmental damage caused by its construction and the increased costs of doing business due to prolonged crossing times. Trump's new wall is likely to make things even worse. Couple that withhis tough talk about renegotiating NAFTA or launching a trade war against Mexico, and the possibility of a borderland recession and massive unemployment only goes up. A surge in undocumented immigration will be sure to follow.
5. Immigration courts are already overwhelmed.
Collateral damage caused by our broken immigration system is most clearly evident in the U.S. immigration courts, which for years have been clogged by ever-increasing deportation caseloads.

During the administration of President George W. Bush, the annual rate of federal criminal prosecutions for immigration offenses more than quadrupled. Starved of resources and plagued by too few judges, the courts conducted proceedings involving as many as 80 migrant cases at a single time, in clear violation of federal law. Not to mention the flood of deportations diverted U.S. attorney offices away from prosecuting more serious cases against international crime and drug cartels.

Under President Barack Obama, deportations continued to rise, reaching record highs of over 400,000 annually. During his second term, Obama increased the number of judges adjudicating these cases and shifted attention away from minor offenders, but the problem of crushing caseloads persists. In 2016, the backlog of cases reached 474,000, climbing to 533,000 in 2017. Wait time for a court hearing averages three years.

Our immigration courts are already poised at breaking point, but Trump announced his intention to target 3 million more people for deportation. If this happens, the immigration court system will simply grind to a halt.

Michael Dear is emeritus professor in the College of Environmental Design at the University of California, Berkeley, and author most recently of Why Walls Won't Work: Repairing the US- Mexico Divide (2015, Oxford University Press).

This article tagged under:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Oh, we're going to build a wall, don't worry about it," President Donald Trump told the crowd gathered to hear him at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Friday. "In fact, it's going to start soon. Way ahead of schedule. Way ahead of schedule. Way, way, way ahead of schedule.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Earlier this month, President Donald Trump Donald John Trump Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress about plans to build Trump Tower in Moscow during 2016 campaign: report DC train system losing 0k per day during government shutdown Senate Republicans eye rules change to speed Trump nominees MORE held a White House press briefing to make a case for his southern border wall with a statement from Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council. As a border patrol agent for 21 years, Mr. Judd told the press, "I can personally tell you ... physical barriers ... walls actually work." In support of his assertion, he claimed that areas with physical barriers had exponential decreases in "illegal immigration."

What Mr. Judd neglected to mention is that Customs and Border Protection measures undocumented migration through the proxy of apprehensions. This is problematic because most immigration scholars regard border apprehensions as a highly imperfect statistical proxy for the volume of undocumented migration. Basically, it isn't a good measure.

Despite Mr. Judd's anecdotal beliefs, the reality is that the border wall will not stop undocumented migration. As an expert in human trafficking and smuggling, I know the evidence suggests it will simply increase the use and price of smugglers.

Prior to 2006, there were only 83 miles of existing fence or wall along the United States-Mexico border. By 2009, fencing and physical barriers increased to cover 580 miles of the southern border. That is an astounding 598 percent expansion in inanimate border barriers in a relatively short period of time. At present, there are 654 miles of border fencing.

Customs and Border Protection leaders such as Mr. Judd believe that the construction of the border wall has been successful in deterring undocumented migration because while border apprehensions fairly steadily increased from 1990 to 2000, after the border wall was expanded, border apprehensions reached a 10-year low in 2011 with only 327,577 apprehensions along the Southwest border.

Although some attribute the substantial decrease in apprehensions to deterrence from the increased border security and construction of massive border barriers, others contend that this same evidence suggests that, in the wake of increased border security, undocumented migrants may be evading detection through the increased use of smugglers.

The process of undocumented migration to the United States has changed since the 1990s as border enforcement was heightened. Increased border enforcement has been linked to the rising use and cost of smugglers by undocumented migrants.

However, this increase is not mirrored by the reported use of smugglers among the apprehended undocumented migrant population. This is because smuggled undocumented migrants are evading detection more often than non-smuggled undocumented migrants. In addition, as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez On The Money: Shutdown Day 27 | Trump fires back at Pelosi by canceling her foreign travel | Dems blast 'petty' move | Trump also cancels delegation to Davos | House votes to disapprove of Trump lifting Russia sanction The battle of energy-economic narratives is tainting the Green New Deal Ocasio-Cortez: 'At what point is Fox News obligated to not lie?' MORE (D-N.Y.) recently pointed out, since 2007 the majority of unauthorized immigrants enter the United States not through undocumented border crossings, but as visa overstays.

Along with the increase in demand for smugglers that has coincided with the contemporary tightening of our southern border, there has been an increase in cost. While smuggling costs in 1980-1981 ranged from $150 to $250 for a coyote, costs increased to $700 in 1996 and ranged from between $5,000 to $10,000 in 2000. According to the Department of Homeland Security ENFORCE data, the average annual growth of real smuggling costs was 5.3 percent from 2000-2006. The cost is much lower for apprehended undocumented migrants when compared to data on smuggler cost for not apprehended undocumented migrants. This suggests that those who are smuggled successfully pay larger sums than those who are not.

Data from the Mexican Migration Project suggest that undocumented migrants from Mexico are less likely to use a smuggler (23.2 percent) than undocumented migrants from other countries and on average pay less (mean $558). However, like other undocumented migrants, Mexican undocumented migrants who used a smuggler are less likely to be apprehended by Customs and Border Protection.

Constructing a border wall has not been empirically shown to deter undocumented migration; instead, it displaces crossing methods and increases the use and cost of smugglers. This is dangerous because smugglers have been known to physically and sexually abuse undocumented migrants and even engage in human trafficking.

Given the nexus between human smuggling and human trafficking, legislators should focus on reducing undocumented migrants' reliance on human smugglers. International migration experts suggest this is an opportune time to shift from a policy of immigration suppression to one of immigration management. Facilitating legal migration would decrease the reliance on smugglers, and granting undocumented migrants legal status likely would increase the rates of return migration.

Ultimately, it is important for Americans to understand that border walls keep undocumented migrants in, not out, and increase the demand for smugglers and their associated criminal networks.
Kimberly Mehlman-Orozco holds a Ph.D. in criminology, law and society from George Mason University, with expertise in human trafficking and immigration. She serves as a human trafficking expert witness for criminal cases and is the author of "Hidden in Plain Sight: America's Slaves of the New Millennium." Follow her on Twitter @MehlmanOrozco.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
illegal immigration to the united states

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Border wall won't stop migrants but will increase use of smugglers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Earlier this month, President Donald Trump Donald John Trump Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress about plans to build Trump Tower in Moscow during 2016 campaign: report DC train system losing 0k per day during government shutdown Senate Republicans eye rules change to speed Trump nominees MORE held a White House press briefing to make a case for his southern border wall with a statement from Brandon Judd, president of the National Border Patrol Council.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A standoff between President Donald Trump and Democratic congressional leaders over how to address unauthorized immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border has led to a partial shutdown of the federal government - one that is now the longest on record.

The United States was home to 10.7 million unauthorized immigrants in 2016, a 13% decline from a peak of 12.2 million in 2007, according to the most recent Pew Research Center estimates. This decade-long decline was driven almost entirely by a decrease in unauthorized immigrants from Mexico, even as the numbers from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras increased. Meanwhile, a growing share of unauthorized immigrants were not people who had entered the country illegally, but had arrived legally and then overstayed their visas.

More recent data from the federal government show that 2018 saw an uptick in border apprehensions (which are often used as a proxy measure for unlawful entries). There were nearly 467,000 apprehensions at the southwest border last year, the most in any calendar year since at least 2012. Still, the number of apprehensions in 2018 remained far below the more than 1 million apprehensions per fiscal year routinely recorded during the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s.

As Trump and Democrats press their cases about ways to end the government shutdown, here's a look at how Americans see illegal immigration - as well as their views toward the president's proposed expansion of the border wall and how much political leaders should be open to compromise:

1 The vast majority of immigrants in the U.S. are in the country legally - but fewer than half of Americans know that's the case. Lawful immigrants accounted for about three-quarters (76%) of all immigrants in the U.S. in 2016. But in a survey conducted in June 2018, only 45% of Americans correctly said most immigrants are in the country legally. Around a third of U.S. adults (35%) incorrectly said that most immigrants are in the country illegally, while 6% said about half of all immigrants are here illegally and half legally. Another 13% did not provide a response.

2 Republican and Democratic voters sharply disagree over whether illegal immigration is a major problem in the U.S. today. In a survey conducted ahead of last year's midterm elections, three-quarters of registered voters who planned to support the GOP candidate in their congressional district said illegal immigration was a very big problem in the country, versus just 19% among voters who planned to support their Democratic candidate for Congress.

3 A majority of Americans (58%) oppose substantially expanding the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border - as Trump has sought - while 40% support doing so, according to a January 2019 survey by the Center. Attitudes diverge sharply by party: Around eight-in-ten Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (82%) support expanding the wall, while an even larger share of Democrats and Democratic leaners (93%) oppose it.

4 In the current stalemate over expanding the border wall, both opponents and supporters of the idea see political concessions as unacceptable, according to the January 2019 survey. Nearly nine-in-ten Americans who oppose expanding the border wall (88%) say it would be unacceptable for Congress to pass a bill that includes Trump's request for wall funding if that is the only way to end the government shutdown. Among the smaller group of Americans who support expanding the border wall, 72% say it would be unacceptable for Congress to pass a bill that does not include Trump's requested funding.

5 Many Americans disapprove of the way shutdown negotiations are being handled. A little over a third of Americans (36%) approve of Trump's handling of the negotiations, while the same share approves of the way congressional Republicans are handling the situation. Public views of Democratic leaders' handling of the shutdown talks are somewhat more positive than views of Trump or GOP leaders - still, less than half (43%) approve.

6 Disagreement between partisans extends to the effects of a wall. Around seven-in-ten Republicans (69%) say substantially expanding the wall along the U.S. border with Mexico would lead to a major reduction in illegal immigration into the country, according to the January 2019 survey. About the same share of Democrats (70%) say it would not have much impact on illegal immigration into the U.S.

7 Proximity to the Mexican border is a factor in Republicans' views of a border wall. Republicans overwhelmingly favor building a wall along the entire border, but Republicans who live closer to the border are somewhat less likely to favor it, according to an analysis by the Center based on February 2017 survey data. The analysis found that 63% of Republicans who live within 350 miles of the border favor a wall along the entire border, compared with 74% of Republicans overall. Among Democrats, opposition to a wall is overwhelming regardless of their distance from the border.

8 Long before the shutdown began, most Democrats - and nearly half of Republicans - said the U.S. would ultimately pay for a wall. Nearly nine-in-ten Democrats (87%) said in February 2017 that the U.S. would end up paying for a wall along the entire U.S. border with Mexico - a view shared by 46% of Republicans. Overall, seven-in-ten U.S. adults said the U.S. would ultimately pay for a wall, while just 16% said Mexico would pay for it.

9 Americans are more inclined to prefer politicians who stick to their positions than those who make compromises with people they disagree with (53% vs. 44%), according to a March 2018 survey. This marked a reversal from July 2017, when nearly six-in-ten Americans (58%) said they preferred politicians who compromised and 39% said they preferred politicians who stick to their positions. In the 2018 survey, there was no difference between Republicans and Democrats in views of compromise. That was a change from the sentiment found in six prior surveys since 2011, in which Democrats were more likely than Republicans to favor politicians who compromised.

10 Whatever else they think of him, about two-thirds of Americans (68%) - including around half of Democrats - say Trump stands up for what he believes in, according to a September 2018 survey. Around nine-in-ten Republicans (91%) say Trump stands up for his beliefs, as do 52% of Democrats - a far higher share of Democrats than give the president positive marks on other personal qualities, such as being a strong leader, being well-informed and being trustworthy.

11 Most Americans hoped for efforts at cooperation between Trump and Democratic leaders in the current Congress, according to a post-election survey conducted in November. More than eight-in-ten U.S. adults (84%) said Trump should cooperate either a great deal (39%) or a fair amount (45%) with Democratic leaders over the next two years. A smaller majority (65%), however, said Democratic leaders should cooperate with Trump a great deal (28%) or a fair amount (36%).
Note: This is an update of a post originally published Jan. 11, 2019.
Topics: Unauthorized Immigration, Immigration Attitudes, Federal Government, Foreign Affairs and Policy, Immigration, National Security

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Americans see illegal immigration, the border wall and political compromise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A standoff between President Donald Trump and Democratic congressional leaders over how to address unauthorized immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border has led to a partial shutdown of the federal government - one that is now the longest on record.