Immigration Law: Comparing Acts and Analyzing the Patriot Act

This assignment analyzes and compares three key immigration laws: the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, the Immigration Act of 1891, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) established in 2003. The paper examines the historical context, problems addressed, public reception, and effectiveness of each. Furthermore, the paper explores the USA Patriot Act of 2001, discussing its purpose, main provisions, and effectiveness in relation to national security and terrorism. The analysis includes a critical assessment of the laws' justifications in their respective cultural contexts and suggests alternative approaches to address the issues. The assignment provides a comprehensive overview of these critical immigration policies and their impact on the United States.

Immigration law

1
Table of Contents
Comparing three immigration law...............................................................................................................2
Research on the USA Patriot Act................................................................................................................2
References...................................................................................................................................................4

2
Comparing three immigration law
The three law which are comparable to each other are the Chinese Exclusion Act 1882, The
Immigration Act of 1891 and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) 2003. President
Chester signed the Chinese Exclusion Act, and it was passed by Congress (Chen, 2015). The
Federal Government of the US signed the Immigration Act, and the Congress passed it whereas
ICE was given by the Department of Homeland Security and the US government signed it. From
this, it is seen that all these immigration acts are different from each other. As per the historical
impact, the Chinese Exclusion Act was made for restricting the immigration purposes of the US.
In between 1870 to 1900, a massive wave of Chinese immigrants arrived in the US and to
prevent them, this law was made (Chen, 2015). The law addressed all the problems of Chinese
labourers in the US. By representing the outcome of anti-immigrant agitation and racial hostility
the law received by the general public. The law justified the culture of the Chinese people, and
thus, it is useful for them to survive in the US. If subsequent amendments are provided to the
labourers, then it can address the problem.
The Immigration Act historical view was to tighten the regulation on the land borders and to
expand the list of deportable and excludable immigrants (Lindsay, 2018). They addressed the
problem of a specific class of American people who were not allowed to enter the country. By
appointing a commanding officer, they provided nationality, name and residence to these people
and then it was received by the general public. They were effected for this class of people as they
were successful in justifying the culture of American. If legal responsibility was adequately
maintained, then it could have addressed the problem differently. The historical context of ICE
demonstrated that the Department of Homeland Security made this act for reducing the level of
attack in the US (Rhodes et al., 2015). Border and Customs protection is the main problem
address by this law. By increasing their responsibility through securing and monitoring the
borders, they received their effort by the general public. The law is effective in reducing the
attack rate in the US. They justified the culture of the US people, but if the law is maintained by
the government, then it can enhance its impact within this country.
Research on the USA Patriot Act
The US Patriot Act was passed in 2001, whose primary purpose is to strengthen the national
security of the US. It was passed for reducing the significant threat that was faced by the national

3
security of this country. The main provisions of this act are to increase the power of the security
ton officers so that they can easily search the business or home without the consent of the owner
(Welch, 2015). It became effective as the act reduces the crime rate in the US. It also defects,
prosecutes and prevents the international money laundering process, and thus, it is effective for
US people. By providing strict law on the international transaction and maintaining a strong
security force can deal with the potential influx of the terrorist that enters in the US illegally.

4
References
Chen, J.J., 2015. The impact of skill-based immigration restrictions: The Chinese Exclusion Act
of 1882. Journal of Human Capital, 9(3), pp.298-328.
Lindsay, M.J., 2018. The Perpetual Invasion: Past as Prologue in Constitutional Immigration
Law. Roger Williams UL Rev., 23, p.369.
Rhodes, S.D., Mann, L., Simán, F.M., Song, E., Alonzo, J., Downs, M., Lawlor, E., Martinez,
O., Sun, C.J., O’Brien, M.C. and Reboussin, B.A., 2015. The impact of local immigration
enforcement policies on the health of immigrant Hispanics/Latinos in the United
States. American Journal of Public Health, 105(2), pp.329-337.
Welch, K., 2015. The Patriot Act and Crisis Legislation: The Unintended Consequences of
Disaster Lawmaking. Cap. UL, Rev., 43, p.481.