The Judicial Bottleneck: A Feature, Not a Flaw, in Immigration Enforcement
THE ACTORS: The primary actors are the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), particularly its enforcement arms like ICE, and the federal judiciary, comprising district court judges and appellate panels. Joe Biden, as the current executive, inherited and largely continued these enforcement structures, with some stated modifications. THE FUNDING: The United States' immigration enforcement budget
has seen consistent increases across administrations. For instance, in fiscal year (FY) 2019, ICE's budget exceeded $8 billion (DHS Appropriations Act, 2019). This funding supports detention facilities, enforcement operations, and the legal defense of government actions. Legal advocacy groups representing immigrants, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), rely on private donations and
grants to fund their litigation efforts. Private contractors, like CoreCivic and GEO Group, profit significantly from the increased detention rates, with contracts worth billions annually from DHS (Homeland Security Committee Report, 2021). THE INCENTIVES: For the executive branch, both under Trump and Biden, rigorous enforcement policies are framed as maintaining border security and national
sovereignty, appealing to a segment of the electorate. The legal challenges, while creating a 'strain,' also serve to prolong detention, delaying reunification or asylum processes, which acts as a deterrent. For private contractors, prolonged detention directly translates to increased revenue. For the judiciary, their incentive is to uphold the law, which paradoxically means processing a higher