By Zechariah Chafee Jr.

Zechariah Chafee Jr.'s "The Inquiring Mind," published in 1928, stands as a seminal work in the discourse on civil liberties, particularly focusing on freedom of speech within the United States. He delves into the intricacies of freedom of speech providing a comprehensive exploration of the legal and philosophical foundations of free expression. The book emerged during a period marked by intense debates over civil liberties, especially in the aftermath of World War I and the accompanying "Red Scare." Chafee's work played a pivotal role in shaping modern First Amendment jurisprudence, influencing both legal scholars and judicial opinions. His defense of free speech contributed to a broader understanding of its essential role in a democratic society, challenging prevailing notions that favored repression over open discourse. The work is a cornerstone in the study of civil liberties, offering enduring insights into the complexities of freedom of speech. Its significance, rich content, and original perspectives continue to inform and challenge modern interpretations of free expression in democratic societies.

Main themes relevant to the modern era are::

• Social Media and Free Speech: The role of platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube in shaping discourse, including issues of content moderation, algorithmic bias, and "cancel culture."

• Misinformation and Fake News: The rise of deepfakes, conspiracy theories, and propaganda, and their impact on public perception and democracy.

• Censorship vs. Safety: The balance between preventing harmful speech (hate speech, extremist content) and protecting the right to express controversial opinions.

• Government and Corporate Influence: The role of states and tech companies in controlling or amplifying speech through regulations and policies.

• AI and the Future of Expression: How AI-generated content, chatbots, and automated censorship tools impact free inquiry.

Video Block

Double-click here to add a video by URL or embed code. Learn more

By Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX)

2025 marks the 10 year anniversary of the Modern Slavery Act. Since that time the gaps in the UK’s systems to prevent, identify and address exploitation, including trafficking and modern slavery, have been well evidenced.

The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill misses a crucial opportunity to drive meaningful change to ensure that all victims of exploitation are protected, whatever their immigration status.

By failing to repeal key elements of the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 and the Illegal Migration Act 2023, this Bill does not address key drivers of exploitation. Instead, this Immigration Enforcement centred approach fails to provide meaningful opportunities for survivors to recover through security and decent work. This only plays into the hands of exploiters.

London: T (FLEX) , 2025. 6p

By Anita Orav

Share this page on FacebookShare this page on XShare this page on LinkedIn

In recent years, the European Union has faced a significant number of asylum applications, with over 513 000 applications received in the first half of 2024 alone. Women and girls make up a substantial proportion of asylum seekers, with one in three asylum-seekers being female. In international law, the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention is the main instrument regulating asylum. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Istanbul Convention provide a framework for protecting the rights of women who seek protection. The EU has developed a common European asylum system that has gradually incorporated gender-sensitive elements in legal texts such as the Qualification Directive, the Asylum Procedures Directive and the Reception Conditions Directive. These directives offer special protection to vulnerable individuals, including women and children. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has played a crucial role in advancing a gender-sensitive approach in EU asylum law, acknowledging the specific experiences and circumstances of women and other vulnerable individuals seeking protection in the EU. The CJEU has recognised gender-based violence as a form of persecution and grounds for asylum or subsidiary protection. It has also acknowledged the importance of considering the individual circumstances and experiences of asylum seekers, particularly women and girls, who may face persecution or harm owing to their adherence to certain values or lifestyles. This aligns with a more gender-sensitive approach in EU asylum law and policy in recent years. Nevertheless continued progress is needed to address the human rights challenges faced by women and girls in asylum procedures.

Bruxelles/Brussels - Belgium : EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service, 2025. 8p.

By Human Rights Watch

This has been a year of elections, resistance, and conflict, testing the integrity of democratic institutions and the principles of international human rights and humanitarian law. Whether in response to heightened repression in Russia, India, and Venezuela, or catastrophic armed conflicts in Gaza, Sudan, and Ukraine, governments around the world are being called upon to demonstrate their commitment to human rights, democracy, and humanitarian action. Many have failed the test. But even outspoken and action-oriented governments have invoked human rights standards weakly or inconsistently, feeding global perceptions that human rights lack legitimacy. That is an irresponsible and dangerous conclusion, and conveniently absolves governments of their legal obligations to uphold international human rights law both at home and in their actions abroad. Reflecting on the events of 2024, this is not a moment to retreat from the protections needed by everyone everywhere. Instead, governments should respect and defend universal human rights with more rigor and urgency than ever, and people and civil society need to remain steadfast in holding them accountable. The Power of Popular Resistance Elections need to abide by human rights standards, but elections are never an end in themselves. While rigged and otherwise unfair elections are a sign of more rights violations to come, even free and fair elections don’t necessarily mean a rights-respecting future. Although over 70 countries conducted national elections in 2024, their full impact on human rights will only be felt in what follows. Racism, hate, and discrimination drove many elections in the past year. In the United States, Donald Trump won the presidency for a second time, raising concerns that his new administration would repeat and even magnify the serious rights violations of his first term. Likewise, in the European Parliament elections of 2024, far-right parties made significant gains, exploiting anti-immigrant sentiment and nationalist rhetoric to advance policies that threaten minority communities and undermine democratic norms. Yet elsewhere, there was meaningful democratic resilience, as voters proved unwilling to accept populist agendas and held leaders and their parties accountable. In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s hate speech on the campaign trail did not win him the electoral majority he craved, showing that even in the face of systemic challenges, democracy can still put a check on power. Authoritarian leaders tightened their grip on power in countries such as Russia, El Salvador and the Sahel nations of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, leveraging fear and misinformation to stifle dissent.

Our Annual Review Of Human Rights HumanRights Watch, 2025. 554p

By The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

The 2024 UNODC Global Report on Trafficking in Persons is the eighth of its kind mandated by the General Assembly through the 2010 United Nations Global Plan of Action to Combat Trafficking in Persons. This edition of the Global Report provides a snapshot of the trafficking patterns and flows at global, regional and national levels. It covers 156 countries and provides an overview of the response to the trafficking in persons by analysing trafficking cases detected between 2019 and 2023. A major focus of this edition of the Report is on trends of detections and convictions that show the changes compared to historical trends since UNODC started to collect data in 2003, and following the Covid-19 Pandemic.

The findings are further informed and enriched through the analysis of summaries of more than 1000 court cases adjudicated between 2012 and 2023, providing closer insights into the crime, its victims and perpetrators, and how trafficking in persons comes to the attention of authorities.

As with previous years, this edition of the Global Report on Trafficking in Persons presents a global picture of the trends, patterns and flows of trafficking (Chapter 1), alongside detailed regional analyses (Chapter 3). This edition of the Global Report presents a special chapter on Africa (Chapter 2) produced with the purpose of unveiling trafficking patterns and flows within the African continent. The chapter is based on unprecedented number of African countries covered for the Global Report.

This edition of the Report presents a new contribution from an early career and young academic researchers, as part of UNODC’s Generation 30 initiative, aimed at building new connections between the UN and academia, while expanding research opportunities for young people. The contributions featured in the report was submitted in response to a call for proposals issued on the UNODC website in 2023.

Vienna: UNODC, 2024. 176p.

By Rodante van der Waal

Reproductive injustice is an urgent global problem. We are faced with the increased criminalization of abortion, higher maternal and neonatal mortality rates for people of color, and

more and more research addressing the structural nature of obstetric violence. In this collection of essays, the cause of reproductive injustice is understood as the institutionalized isolation of (potentially) pregnant people, making them vulnerable for bio- and necropolitical disciplination and control. The central thesis of this book is that reproductive justice must be achieved through a radical reappropriation of relationality in reproductive care to safeguard the access to knowledge and care needed for safe bodily self-determination. Through empirical research as well as decolonial, feminist, midwifery, and Black theory, reproductive justice is reimagined as abolitionist care, grounded in the abolition of authoritative obstetric institutions, state control of reproduction, and restrictive abortion laws in favor of community practices that are truly relational.

Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2025. 496p.

Edited By S Irudaya Rajan

South Asia Migration Report 2024 documents key themes of remittances, resilience, and rehabilitation from the region. This volume: • Includes dedicated fieldwork to map migration within and outside South Asia; • Analyses the impact of Covid-19 on migrants and migration in South Asia; • Highlights the plight of Afghan migrants post-Taliban takeover in the country. This book will be indispensable for scholars and researchers of economics, development studies, migration and diaspora studies, gender studies, labour studies and sociology. It will also be useful to policymakers, think tanks and government institutions working in the area.

Oxford, UK: Routledge India, 2025. 242p.

By Nina Mast

This spotlight details the racist history of tipping, federal and state policy governing tipped work, and the experience of tipped workers in the economy—both nationwide and in the South. Across the country, tipped workers are more likely to be people of color, women, women of color, or single parents, and are disproportionately born outside of the United States. Tipped workers earn low wages, experience high rates of poverty, and are vulnerable to exploitation in the workplace—particularly in the form of wage theft and sexual harassment. The South has the largest tipped workforce of any region. Tipped workers in the South are paid the second lowest median wage of any region, and most Southern states allow employers to pay tipped workers as little as $2.13 an hour. Hispanic workers in the South are overrepresented in tipped work, as are women—who account for 70% of the tipped workforce despite making up less than half of all workers in the region.

Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute, June 18, 2024. 14p.

By Iran Human Rights

Qarchak Prison in Varamin (Tehran province) has become one of the darkest symbols of systematic human rights violations in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Originally designed as a poultry farm, the facility has been transformed into an inhumane detention centre for women prisoners, including political prisoners. The conditions in this prison not only violate international principles such as the Bangkok Rules1 and the Nelson Mandela Rules but also disregard the most basic principles of human dignity. At Qarchak, women are confined in extremely cramped spaces with inadequate ventilation and lighting. They endure unsanitary drinking water, poor-quality food, lack of adequate healthcare services, and degrading, gender-based treatment as part of their daily suffering. Qarchak is not only a prison filled with violence and abuse but also, due to severe overcrowding and lack of basic facilities, many prisoners are deprived even of sleeping space, forced to sleep on the floor. The prison is also a glaring symbol of violations against women and mothers. Mothers whose children stay with them in this hazardous and polluted environment until the age of two when they are taken into state care. Often, these mothers have no means to find out about their children’s fate. Undocumented children born in this prison are caught in a cycle of deprivation and injustice from the moment they are born. IHRNGO Director, Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam stated: “Qarchak Prison is a symbol of the blatant denial of humanity and human dignity. The continued operation of such facilities is a stain on the conscience of the world. Today, more than ever, we must call on the international community not to remain silent in the face of such widespread human rights violations.” By publishing this report, IHRNGO reiterates its demand for the immediate closure of Qarchak Prison and the transfer of all prisoners to facilities that meet minimum international standards. The existence of such places, especially in the 21st century, is a stark reminder that justice and human dignity are still sacrificed in many parts of the world. We call on the international community, human rights organisations, and all conscientious individuals to take action to close down Qarchak Prison. This should not merely be seen as a domestic issue; it is a test for the international community to unite in defending human dignity and rights. The closure of Qarchak Prison is a necessary step toward securing prisoners’ rights and a symbol of global commitment to justice and humanity.

Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO) , 2024. 18p.

By Alex Papadovassilakis, et al.

One year ago, in the early hours of January 15, 2024, Bernardo Arévalo was sworn in as president of Guatemala. His inauguration marked the culmination of a historic upset, in which Arévalo – a rank outsider campaigning on a promise to root out high-level graft – bested a series of candidates linked to elite corruption networks attempting to tighten their grip on the state. Arévalo and his party, the Seed Movement (Movimiento Semilla), then survived a wave of legal attacks that sought to prevent the president-elect from even taking office. Having accomplished his improbable rise to the presidency, Arévalo has spent his first year in power pursuing the paradoxical task of advancing an anti-corruption agenda in a country where corruption is the norm. Guatemala’s institutions have long been infiltrated by corrupt actors seeking to plunder state funds for personal gain and further illicit schemes, while the justice system has long responded to the interests of elites seeking to shield themselves from prosecution for these transgressions. Arévalo took on this mission with only limited tools at his disposal. The president inherited a compromised set of ministries and executive agencies, responsible for administering billions of dollars in public funds. His inexperienced party, Semilla, founded in July 2017 and thrust into power for the first time, remains a minority force in a Congress dominated by old guard lawmakers. And the administration is reckoning with a hollowed-out justice system that has shown far more interest in persecuting Arévalo and Semilla than investigating high level corruption and organized crime. Faced with these restraints, the Arévalo administration has neither been able to develop a coherent plan for tackling corruption nor succeed in enacting tangible anti-graft reforms. The government has also dedicated valuable time and resources to repelling controversial legal attacks from prosecutors linked to the elite networks that oppose Arévalo’s reformist platform. Within this highly unstable environment, InSight Crime embarked on an investigation aimed at evaluating the main roadblocks to implementing an anti-corruption agenda in the current political climate in Guatemala. We have focused on resistance presented by corruption networks embedded in key branches of the state.

Insight Crime, 2025. 7p,

Edited by Becky Batagol, Kate Seear, Heli Askola and Jamie Walvisch

In this book, leading law academics along with lawyers, activists and others demonstrate what legislation could look like if its concern was to create justice for women. Each chapter contains a short piece of legislation – proposed in order to address a contemporary legal problem from a feminist perspective. These range across criminal law (sexual offences, Indigenous women’s experiences of criminal law, laws in relation to forced marriage, modern slavery, childcare and sentencing), civil law (aged care and housing rights, regulating the gig economy; surrogacy, gender equity in the construction industry) and constitutional law (human rights legislation, reimagining parliaments where laws are made for the benefit of women). The proposed laws are, moreover, drafted with feedback from a senior parliamentary draftsperson (providing guidance to contributors in a personal capacity), to ensure conformity with legislative rigour, as well as accompanied by an explanation of their reasons and their aims. Although the legislation is Australian-based, the issues raised by each are recognisably global, and are reflected in the legislation of most other nations. This first feminist legislation project will appeal to scholars of feminist legal studies, gender and the law, gender studies and others studying or working in relevant legal areas.

London; New York: Routledge, 2025. 392p.

By Marcin Rojszczak

This book discusses contemporary standards of legal safeguards in the area of bulk electronic surveillance from the perspective of the European legal model. Bulk, or untargeted, surveillance, although traditionally associated with the interception of electronic communications, is increasingly used as a convenient tool for collecting information on large groups of society. The collection of redundant information, which is intrinsic to bulk surveillance, is no longer a side effect but an important objective of the use of bulk powers. As a result, untargeted surveillance is everywhere increasingly being implemented, and without any clear link to state security or crime-fighting objectives. This work examines the origins of untargeted measures, explores their mechanics and key concepts, and defines what distinguishes them from other forms of surveillance. The various elements of the legal safeguards in place, which are fundamental to protecting individuals from the risks of abuse of power, are analysed in detail. The book discusses not only the different standards of legal safeguards, but also gives examples of their implementation in individual European countries. It also examines the relationship between the development of the global data market and untargeted surveillance powers, in particular in the context of the risks associated with algorithmic surveillance, client-side scanning, the privatisation of surveillance – or surveillance as a service – and the increasingly widespread use of preventive content filtering mechanisms. The book will be a valuable resource for academics and researchers working in the areas of law, international relations, public policy, engineering and sociology. It will also appeal to professionals dealing with various aspects of the use of surveillance measures, such as experts, members of the legislature and law enforcement agencies.

London; New York: Routledge, 2025. 290p.

Edited by Anniina Autero, Marcela de Moraes Batista Simão, Ilari Karppi

This open access book explores the use of technologies for urban safety and security. Rather than focusing on the technologies themselves, it provides and in-depth analysis of the complex urban transformations linked to the increasing integration of technical systems in the built environment. Interdisciplinary contributions explain how technologies can improve urban safety, whilst offering a broader discussion relative to urban, socio-economic and political factors. Against simplistic techno-solutionist ideas, the authors illustrate the role of technology as means to an end and show how technologies can widen our understanding of safety and security. Readers are introduced to issues relative to the practical implementation, development, and testing of urban technologies via numerous case studies from cities around the world.

Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan, 2025. 317p.

By Marie Segrave and Stefani Vasil

This book explores the structural harm of borders and non-citizenship, specifically temporary non-citizenship, in the perpetuation of domestic and family violence (DFV). It focuses on the stories and situations of over 300 women in Australia. The analysis foregrounds how the state and the migration system both sustain and enable violence against women. In doing so this book demonstrates how structural violence is an insidious component of gendered violence – limiting and curtailing women’s safety. The Borders of Violence advances contemporary research on DFV by considering the role of the state and the migration system. It bridges different fields of scholarship to interrogate our knowledge about DFV and its impacts and improve our critical accounts of gender, structural violence and borders. It illuminates the ways in which temporary non-citizens are often silenced and/or their experiences are obfuscated by state processes, policies and practices, which are weaponised by perpetrators in countries of destination and origin, with impunity. An accessible and compelling read, this book will appeal to students and scholars of border criminology, criminology, sociology, politics, sociology, law and social policy. It offers key insights for professionals, policymakers, stakeholders and advocates working broadly to support temporary non-citizens and/or to address and eliminate violence against women.

London; New York: Routledge, 2025. 223p

Edited by Jens Boel, Perrine Canavaggio and Antonio González Quintana

Why and how can records serve as evidence of human rights violations, in particular crimes against humanity, and help the fight against impunity? Archives and Human Rights shows the close relationship between archives and human rights and discusses the emergence, at the international level, of the principles of the right to truth, justice and reparation. Through a historical overview and topical case studies from different regions of the world the book discusses how records can concretely support these principles. The current examples also demonstrate how the perception of the role of the archivist has undergone a metamorphosis in recent decades, towards the idea that archivists can and must play an active role in defending basic human rights, first and foremost by enabling access to documentation on human rights violations. Confronting painful memories of the past is a way to make the ghosts disappear and begin building a brighter, more serene future. The establishment of international justice mechanisms and the creation of truth commissions are important elements of this process. The healing begins with the acknowledgment that painful chapters are essential parts of history; archives then play a crucial role by providing evidence. This book is both a tool and an inspiration to use archives in defence of human rights.

Routledge, 2021. 353p

By Hilary Francis

In recent years, child migrants from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador have made the perilous journey to the United States in unprecedented numbers, but their peers in Nicaragua have remained at home. Nicaragua also enjoys lower murder rates and far fewer gang problems when compared with her neighbours. Why is Nicaragua so different? The present government has promulgated a discourse of Nicaraguan exceptionalism, arguing that Nicaragua is unique thanks to the heritage of the 1979 Sandinista revolution. This volume critically interrogates that claim, asking whether the legacy of the revolution is truly exceptional. An interdisciplinary work, the book brings together historians, anthropologists and sociologists to explore the multifarious ways in which the revolutionary past continues to shape public policy – and daily life – in Nicaragua’s tumultuous present.

London: University of London Press, 2020. 198p.

By Joseph V. Cuffari

Why We Did This Audit - The dramatic increases in migrant encounters and traffic at the Southwest border have magnified existing staffing challenges at CBP and ICE. In light of these intensifying issues, we conducted this audit to determine whether CBP and ICE are effectively managing law enforcement staffing resources to accomplish their mission at the Southwest border. What We Recommend We made three recommendations to help CBP and ICE better manage resources along the Southwest border.

Washington, DC: OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL Department of Homeland Security, 2023. 65p.

By Denise Gilman

The United States treats asylum as exceptional, meaning that asylum is presumptively unavailable and is offered only in rare cases. This exceptionality conceit, combined with an exclusionary apparatus, creates a problematic cycle. The claims of asylum seekers arriving as part of wide-scale refugee flows are discounted, and restrictive policies are adopted to block these claims. When asylum claims nonetheless continue to mount, the United States asserts “crisis” and deploys new exclusionary measures. The problems created by the asylum system are not addressed but are instead deepened. This Article encourages a turn away from policies that have led down the same paths once and again. This Article first describes the development of the modern U.S. asylum system, highlighting data that demonstrates the extent to which exceptionality is a basic feature of the system. In doing so, this Article reconsiders an assumption underlying much scholarship and commentary—that the U.S. asylum system is fundamentally generous even if it has sometimes failed to live up to its promise. This Article then establishes that the emphasis on exceptionality has led to an exclusionary asylum process. Most asylum claims are adjudicated within deportation proceedings, and policymakers have imposed layers of additional procedural barriers. Next, this Article presents the problems created by the system. It documents how the system places genuine asylees in danger while causing violence at the border. Further, embedded bias in the system, resulting from the focus on exceptionality, favors asylum claims from far-flung nations such as China over commonly arising claims from nearby troubled countries. This bias creates a legitimacy problem. The system also violates U.S. law and international human rights and refugee law  This Article concludes by offering suggestions for more stable, effective, and humane policies to address asylum seekers in the United States. In addition to eliminating many existing substantive restrictions on asylum, the system should incorporate group-based eligibility for applicants from designated nations or situations that are sending significant refugee flows. Finally, the United States should adopt a specialiZed non-adversarial asylum system for all cases, apart from the deportation system and with genuine independent review of denials of asylum.

  Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, 2023.

By Cecilia Menjívar

Stumpf and Manning’s Article, Liminal Immigration Law, explains the origin, mechanisms, and persistence of liminal laws in three cases they analyze: DACA, immigration detainers, and administrative closure. Their analysis unearths key similarities across these cases: the “stickiness” and robustness of liminal rules, their transitory nature, and their flexibility in contrast to the inflexibility of traditional law. This Essay expands Stumpf and Manning’s analysis by considering social science scholarship on the legal production of legal statuses. It examines the liminal case of Temporary Protected Status to capture the effects of liminality on the ground for individuals and families, the power of liminal rules as an instrument of immigration control and governance, and the key role of racialization practices in the creation, interpretation, and implementation of liminal rules. The conceptual extension in this Essay exemplifies how the analytic lens that Stumpf and Manning propose will prove generative for legal, socio-legal, and social science scholarship more generally.  

  IOWA LAW REVIEW ONLINE,  Vol. 110:51 2024, 16 p.

By William A. Kandel

Four major principles underlie current U.S. legal permanent immigration policy: allowing families to reunify, admitting needed skilled workers, providing humanitarian protection, and fostering geographic diversity among lawful permanent residents (LPRs; also referred to as immigrants). These principles are embodied in provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) for family-sponsored immigration, employment-based immigration, the U.S. refugee and asylee programs, and the diversity immigrant visa, respectively. Additional INA provisions provide LPR status but account for relatively few immigrants. Among these are special immigrant visas for certain Iraqis and Afghans employed by U.S. Government and their spouses and children; cancellation of removal for foreign nationals in removal proceedings; U nonimmigrant visas for crime victims who assist law enforcement agencies; and T status for human trafficking victims. As defined in the INA, the term “immigrants” is synonymous with LPRs, also known more informally as green card holders, and refers to foreign nationals who come to live lawfully and permanently in the United States. Foreign nationals can either apply to adjust from a temporary, typically nonimmigrant status to LPR status from within the United States, or apply for an immigrant visa from a U.S. embassy or consulate and request admission as an LPR upon arrival to the United States from abroad. The INA imposes an annual worldwide permanent immigration level of 675,000 persons: 480,000 family-sponsored immigrants, made up of family-sponsored “immediate relatives” and “preference immigrants”; 140,000 employment-based immigrants; and 55,000 diversity immigrants. However, the INA worldwide limit is a permeable cap that is regularly breached because immediate relatives and asylees are not numerically limited. In addition, the number of refugees admitted each year is determined by the President in consultation with Congress. As a result, the number of individuals approved for LPR status each year typically exceeds the INA numerical limits that are intended to process this demand fairly and in accordance with the national interest. In FY2023, the United States granted LPR status to 1,172,910 foreign nationals. The INA further imposes, for family-sponsored preference and employment-based immigrants, a per-country limit of 7% of their annual worldwide levels. The 7% limit is intended to prevent nationals of one or a few countries from dominating immigrant flows. For countries that send many prospective immigrants to the United States, the 7% limit often results in years-long waits for LPR status. From FY2014 to FY2023, the United States granted LPR status to an average of about 1 million foreign nationals each year. Of these, 65% acquired LPR status as family-based immigrants, 16% as employment-based immigrants, 11% as refugees and asylees adjusting to LPR status, 4% as diversity immigrants, and 4% as other immigrants. On average, 54% of all immigrants adjusted to LPR status from within the United States during this time. Top immigrant source countries over the period included Mexico (14%), China (7%), India (6%), the Philippines (5%), and the Dominican Republic (5%). In FY2024, an estimated 4 million prospective family-sponsored preference immigrants possessed approved immigrant petitions and were waiting overseas to apply for a statutorily numerically limited immigrant visa. In addition, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has approved a sizeable number of petitions for family-sponsored preference and employment-based immigrants based in the United States and overseas who represent an indeterminate number of prospective immigrants in a corresponding and sometimes overlapping queue. USCIS also has about 230,000 pending petitions for U nonimmigrant status pertaining to crime victims which, if approved, would make these petitioners eligible for LPR status. Proponents of reducing permanent immigration often contend that family-sponsored immigration allows relatively large numbers of foreign nationals to settle permanently in the United States without regard to their skills, education levels, potential contributions to the U.S. economy or potential fiscal impacts on U.S. taxpayers. Others argue that family-sponsored immigration should be limited to immediate relatives of U.S. citizens and LPRs. Still others support limiting employmentbased LPRs to only very highly skilled workers, admitting employment-based immigrants using merit-based point systems instead of or in addition to employer sponsorship, and eliminating the diversity immigrant program. Proponents of increasing permanent immigration typically emphasize the positive impacts of skilled and other migration generally to the U.S. economy, the need for more workers in labor-short occupations and industries, or concerns over demographic trends that portend future U.S. population decline.  

Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service 2024.   27p.