Gérer la citoyenneté, la sécurité et les droits: comprendre la régulation de la migration de mariage en Europe et en Amérique du Nord.
With the slowdown in recent immigration, Mexican immigrants living in the United States today are a more settled population than they were 25 years ago, an era before large numbers of their authorized and unauthorized fellow citizens crossed the U.S.-Mexico border. Compared with 1990, Mexican immigrants in 2013 were considerably older (median age of 39 vs. 29), better educated (42% with high school diploma or more vs. 24%) and had been in the U.S. for longer (77% had been in the U.S. for more than a decade, compared with 50%).
Overall, migration flows between the U.S. and Mexico have slowed down. But the net flow from Mexico to the U.S. is now negative, as return migration of Mexican nationals and their children is now higher than migration of Mexicans heading to the U.S. These new findings are based on Pew Research Center estimates using U.S. Census Bureau surveys to measure inflow of Mexican immigrants to the U.S. and the National Survey on Demographic Dynamics (ENADID) from Mexico’s chief statistical agency (INEGI), which measures the number of Mexican immigrants who have moved back to Mexico after living in the U.S. between 2009 and 2014.
More Mexican immigrants have returned to Mexico from the U.S. than have migrated here since the end of the Great Recession, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of newly available government data from both countries. The same data sources also show the overall flow of Mexican immigrants between the two countries is at its smallest since the 1990s, mostly due to a drop in the number of Mexican immigrants coming to the U.S.
The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS) is today releasing an important and timely report offering vital information on US immigrants who are potentially eligible to naturalize.
This issue brief summarizes the available data and qualitative research on where unaccompanied child migrants are being placed, how they are faring in immigration court, what types of services are available to them, and how communities, in particular schools, are adapting to their arrival.
As policymakers address these questions, it is worth reviewing some key facts about refugee resettlement in the United States that have often been overlooked in current debates. This fact sheet, drawn from recent Migration Policy Institute (MPI) research, analysis of U.S. government policies, and other sources, covers key questions such as refugee benefits use, employment, and educational attainment; the screening that would-be refugees have to go through before admission; and the likely integration picture for Syrian refugees.
Les facilitateurs de migration sont d'importants participants au sein de l'augmentation marquée de la comercialisation des politiques des frontières. En se concentrant sur les connexions entre les facilitateurs de migration et les autorités étatiques, ce papier explore la façon dont les facilitateurs de migration se rapportent au domaine de la loi, ainsi que la façon dont la loi se rapporte à la migration organisée.
Migration brokers are important participants within the increasingly commercialized policing of borders. Focusing on connections between migration brokers and state authorities, this paper asks how migration brokers relate to the realm of the law, as well as how the law relates to migration brokerage.
L'étude de jugements de la Cour européenne des droits humains et de la Cour suprême du Canada à travers une série de cas impliquant de non-citoyens et la sécurité nationale révèle que les Cours font non seulement circuler des pratiques et des arguments légaux entre les juridictions, mais elles font également circuler - possiblement par inadvertance - des fausses représentations des pratiques, tout en restant stratégiement sourde aux arguments dissidents.
Tracking judgments from the European Court of Human Rights and the Supreme Court of Canada across a series of cases dealing with non-citizens and national security reveals that courts not only circulate practices and legal arguments between jurisdictions, they also circulate – perhaps inadvertently – misrepresentations of practices, and remain strategically deaf to dissonant arguments.