Case Study Analysis – Congress, the President, and the INS: Who’s in Charge of U.S. Immigration Policy?

Political pundits have, over the past two decades, explored the “dual principles” problem that afflicts the United States of America (USA) and how it has increasingly become an impediment to the effective implementation of policy. It was for this very reason that Marc R. Rosenblum, a seasoned expert in regional migration, decided to explore immigration policy in his case study dubbed “Congress, the President, and the INS: Who’s in Charge of U.S. Immigration Policy?”. The purpose of this research paper is consequently to make an analysis of the major points made in this case study, discuss alternative solutions while also ensuring that a comprehensive application of Biblical principles is provided.

In his case study, Rosenblum concedes that competition exists within the American political structure. Both the president and Congress seek to control policies that are to be implemented by select state apparatus in addition to also monitoringits enforcement agents. These circumstances wind up breeding agency slack since the individuals expected to be subjected to immigration regulation are essentially always on the move. The author also notes that Congress ultimately has a hard time writing complete contracts owing to federal weaknesses that affect the formulation of operative policies. Moreover, Rosenblum points out the likelihood of migration bureaucrats in federal government being more informed about a policy as compared to their counterparts in the political sphere. The author vividly elucidates the fact that the president and Congress incentivize this chasm by having conflicting preferences with reference to immigration policy. As a result, Congress increasingly focuses on domestic political trepidations while the president seeks a more stable immigration policy that is acceptable to the international community. The findings from the case study thus suggest that the president has succeeded in using immigration as a foreign policy tool even when Congress underscores an orientation towards domestic preferences.

A possible alternative to this prevailing competition in the implementation of sound immigration policy is having clear roles that each arm of government has to play. In this respect, Congress will be solely tasked with formulating laws and policies to be implemented by immigration agencies. Congress will also be expected to inquire all the methods that will be used to enforce the immigration policy that was selected. By so doing, an all-inclusive review of the implementation will be provided, in addition to providing the president with regularly briefings. On the other hand, the president has to provide an enabling environment for scrutiny of their foreign policy to make certain that it is always in tandem with national ideals(COX, 2018). The president, therefore, has to grant Congress unprecedented access to the executive’s activities related to immigration as per democratic ideals. There have been numerous occasions when presidents have invoked the doctrine of executive privilege to avoid disclosing crucial information to Congress(Ciment & Radzilowski, 2013, p. 74).  From a Biblical perspective, these two arms of government can use the principle of discussion, right attitude and collaboration to foster a win-win situation. Abraham and Lot were plagued by conflict in their interactions and it was only after the application of these codes that they were able to foster harmony. Contentious issues were approached with the right attitude, all facts discussed and a collaborative approach employed to enhance consensus. These tactics can also be useful in dealing with the competition pitting Congress against the presidency in the implementation of an immigration policy, eventually promoting cooperation.

In finality, competition between the executive and Congress concerning the implementation of an immigration policy in the United States is a reality that the state now has to grapple with. Marc R. Rosenblum reveals the consequence of this reality through the president’s use of immigration policy as a contrivance for foreign policy campaigns, often undermining Congress. Nonetheless, solutions can be realized through the use of a collaborative approach that ensures all arms of government work towards the realization of a shared immigration policy.

Order Unique Answer Now

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *