Amid declining public support for mass deportation, the American Immigration Council has proposed a new framework aimed at reforming the U.S. immigration enforcement system to prioritize fairness and accountability.
Washington, D.C., May 12 – The American Immigration Council has unveiled a new framework advocating for a comprehensive overhaul of the United States immigration enforcement system. This proposal highlights the disconnect between current enforcement practices and public safety, arguing that the immigration debate has been reduced to a false dichotomy of either mass deportation or no enforcement at all.
Titled “Restoring Credibility and Humanity: A New Framework for Immigration Enforcement,” the document outlines a roadmap designed to replace indiscriminate mass deportation with a system that emphasizes compliance with the law, prioritizes genuine public safety threats, and ensures proportionate consequences along with meaningful accountability for government abuses.
The proposal emerges in the wake of increasing backlash against the mass deportation agenda implemented during the Trump administration, which has adversely affected long-term residents, families, business owners, and individuals actively seeking lawful status.
“Mass deportation has eroded public trust in the federal government by treating every immigrant as a violent criminal,” stated Nayna Gupta, national policy director and co-author of the report. “A credible system should provide a pathway for those who wish to follow the rules and impose consequences that are proportional to the actual violation. The Trump administration weaponized outdated laws, using detention and deportation as a one-size-fits-all punishment, even for individuals with deep community ties who pose no public safety threat.”
The framework proposes significant reforms across four key pillars:
First, it suggests creating a new process that allows long-term undocumented residents to obtain lawful permanent status through alternatives such as fines, community service, and probation-like systems, rather than facing deportation.
Second, it calls for revising outdated laws to concentrate enforcement efforts on individuals convicted of violent or particularly serious recent crimes, while also professionalizing the enforcement process.
Third, the proposal advocates for legislating new, proportionate consequences for violations of immigration law, moving away from the current practice of subjecting all immigration violators to detention and deportation.
Finally, it emphasizes the need for independent oversight and enhanced court authority to hold immigration agencies and agents accountable for any abuses of power.
The framework contends that immigration enforcement should not be measured solely by the number of deportations executed, but rather by the consistency, fairness, and humanity with which laws are enforced.
“The whole goal when all this immigration stuff started ramping up about a year and a half ago was to get violent offenders off the street. And no one has any problem with that,” remarked Joseph Kennedy, sheriff of Dubuque County, Iowa. “The issue is you have people who are here and they are following the rules—people who are reporting to their regular check-ins and being taken into custody at those check-ins. Such practices erode trust and ultimately make it more dangerous for everyone when law enforcement cannot be trusted.”
The framework also emphasizes the necessity of sweeping accountability reforms, asserting that public confidence in immigration enforcement cannot be restored without meaningful oversight and consequences for abuses of power. This includes proposals for expanding judicial authority to review unlawful enforcement actions, establishing an independent immigration accountability commission, strengthening internal oversight offices within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and allowing victims of civil rights violations to pursue legal action.
“Building a credible and humane immigration enforcement system depends on establishing that enforcement agencies are accountable both to the public and other branches of government,” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow and co-author of the report. “No law enforcement agency can maintain legitimacy if abuses of power carry no consequences. A credible enforcement system must empower courts and Congress to intervene when federal agencies and officers exceed their authority.”
The framework warns that the United States has reached a critical juncture after decades of immigration policymaking overly focused on punishment rather than long-term compliance and public safety. The report cautions that continuing down the path of indiscriminate enforcement risks entrenching the country in a permanent system of mass detention and social disruption.
“We are facing a choice between indiscriminate enforcement that destabilizes communities and diverts resources from genuine public safety threats, versus credible enforcement that is targeted, proportional, and capable of delivering actual public safety,” Gupta added. “The question is not whether immigration laws should be enforced. The question is whether enforcement will be smart, focused, and humane, or driven by fear, quotas, and political theater.”
The full framework is available for review on the American Immigration Council’s website.
According to American Immigration Council.