WASHINGTON, DC, Tuesday, May 12 – Today, the U.S. Immigration Council announced a new framework calling for an overhaul of the U.S. immigration enforcement system. This framework argues that the country’s current approach is fundamentally divorced from public safety and traps the immigration debate in a false dichotomy between mass deportations and no deportations at all.
“Restoring Credibility and Humanity: A New Framework for Immigration Enforcement” provides a roadmap to replace indiscriminate mass deportations with a system that focuses on strengthening compliance with the law, prioritizing threats to public safety, proportionate consequences, and meaningful accountability for government abuses.
Read the framework here.
The proposal comes amid growing backlash against the Trump administration’s mass deportation plan, which has swept away longtime residents, families, business owners and people actively pursuing legal status.
“Mass deportations treat all immigrants as violent criminals and undermine public trust in the federal government,” said Naina Gupta, Director of National Policy and co-author of the report. “A trustworthy system should give people who want to follow the rules a way to do so, and give them consequences commensurate with actual violations. The Trump administration has weaponized outdated laws that use detention and deportation as uniform punishments, even for people with long-standing connections who pose no threat to public safety.”
The framework proposes key reforms across four pillars:
Create a new process for long-term undocumented residents to obtain legal permanent resident status through systems such as fines, community service, and probation, rather than deportation. Reform outdated laws and professionalize enforcement, with a focus on people recently convicted of violent crimes or particularly serious crimes. Rather than subjecting all immigration law violators to detention and deportation, legislate new commensurate penalties for immigration violations. Establish independent oversight and stronger court powers to hold immigration agents and officials accountable for abuses.
This framework argues that immigration enforcement should be measured not by the number of deportations but by whether laws are consistently, fairly, and humanely enforced.
“When these immigration-related efforts started ramping up about a year and a half ago, the whole goal was to get violent criminals off the streets. And no one gives a damn about that. The problem is the people who come here and follow the rules. The people who report to regular check-ins and are detained at check-in. Things like that really erode trust, and when you can’t trust law enforcement, it becomes a real danger to everyone here,” said Sheriff Joseph Kennedy. Originally from Dubuque County, Iowa.
The framework also calls for fundamental accountability reform, arguing that public trust in immigration enforcement cannot be rebuilt without meaningful oversight and addressing abuses of power. This means that institutions and agents that abuse their power should be restrained or eliminated. The proposal calls for expanding judicial authority to review law enforcement actions, creating an independent immigration accountability board, strengthening internal oversight bodies within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and giving victims of civil rights violations the ability to sue, among other recommendations.
“Creating a reliable and humane immigration enforcement system depends on establishing that enforcement agencies are accountable both to the public and to other branches of government,” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior researcher and co-author of the report. “No law enforcement agency can maintain legitimacy when abuses of power have no consequences. A reliable enforcement system must give courts and Congress greater authority to intervene when federal agencies and officials abuse their powers.”
The framework warns that the United States is reaching a tipping point after decades of failed immigration policies that focused too much on punishment rather than long-term compliance and public safety. Continuing down the path of indiscriminate enforcement risks trapping the country in a permanent system of mass detention and social disorder, the report says.
“We are forced to choose between indiscriminate enforcement, which destabilizes communities and draws resources away from real public safety threats, and credible enforcement, which is targeted, proportionate, and actually delivers public safety,” Mr. Gupta said. “The question is not whether we should enforce immigration laws. The question is whether enforcement will be smart, focused, and humane, or driven by fear, quotas, and political theater.”
The complete framework is available here.
