The Migration Policy Institute released a report this week detailing the problems for immigrants following Sept. 11 and the steps that may be taken to avoid these consequences in the future. “America’s Challenge: Domestic Security, Civil Liberties and National Unity After September 11” integrates both civil liberties and national security to show a possible solution for the new situation that the United States government is facing.

The report states that the blanket measures implemented by the U.S. government, such as roundups and arrests, intimidating interviews, lengthy detention, and special registration, were ineffective tools for preventing terrorism. In fact, the report concludes that despite the use of these tools, many of the Sept. 11 terrorists would probably be admitted to the United States today since most had no previous criminal, terrorist, or immigration record.

MPI was able to compile information on more than 400 of the Sept. 11 detainees through interviews with lawyers and community leaders and through a survey of press reports, largely in local media. The report details the violations of due process and harsh law enforcement measures that were directly solely at males from Arab and Muslim countries. Unlike the hijackers, the majority had significant ties to the United States and roots in their communities. Of the 400, over 46 percent had been in the U.S. for at least six years and almost half had spouses, children, or other family relationships in the U.S.

This information comes during a wave of criticism concerning the post-Sept. 11 measures. Last week there was a conference hosted by the Center for Migration Studies (CMS) and the Catholic Immigration Network, Inc. (CLINIC) where national security experts questioned the effectiveness of the immigration restrictions.

At the conference, Vincent Cannistraro, a consultant on intelligence and terrorism for ABC World News with Peter Jennings and the former chief of operations and analyst in the CIA’s Counter-Terrorism Center, said, “When we attach the blunt instrument of immigration policy and enforcement to the [select immigrant] communities, we undercut the basis of any cooperation with the FBI and local law enforcement. And that’s the problem that I see…we’re using immigration policy as a proxy for law enforcement and it is a poor proxy because it alienates the very communities that we need to depend on for early warning. The FBI needs to be able to collect intelligence on imminent threats in the United States. To do that, it needs to work with immigrant communities.”

The same concerns are described in detail in the report, along with possible solutions to avoid a similar situation again. The report states that any success that the government has had in apprehending terrorists have not come from immigration initiatives, but from international intelligence breakthroughs, law enforcement cooperation, informed from arrests made abroad, and interagency information sharing. This highlights the fact that for a counterterrorism program to be effective, intelligence and immigration policy have to work together.

"The America's Challenge report offers many practical recommendations,” said Stephen W. Yale-Loehr, teaches immigration law at Cornell Law School and is the co-author of Immigration Law and Procedure, a 20-volume immigration law treatise. “If Congress and the administration implement those recommendations, we can improve immigration policy and make the United States safer at the same time."

“America’s Challenge” examines the government’s post-Sept. 11 immigration measures from three distinct perspectives: their effectiveness in fighting terrorism; their impact on civil liberties; and their effect on America’s sense of community as a nation of immigrants. While delving in deeper than the recent report by the Justice Department’s inspector general, the MPI identifies weaknesses in interagency coordination that are hampering counterterrorism efforts and damaging other key national interests.

The report also reviews how immigrant groups have been targeted during national security crises throughout American history and investigates the impact of current measures on America’s communities of Arabs and Muslims. By using programs such as special registration to sweep up those with minor immigration violations, the government has discouraged compliance by raising fears that deportation could be the price of participation and cooperation.

However, the fear has led to a newfound sense of pride in many communities. “The experience of Muslim and Arab communities post-September 11 is, in many ways, an impressive story of a community that first felt intimidated but has since started to assert its place in the American body politic,” said Muzaffar Chishti, Senior Policy Analyst at MPI and a co-author of the report.

In addition to the co-authors mentioned above, the authors who prepared the report were from a broad range of backgrounds with a focus on immigration concerns. Doris Meissner is a Senior Fellow at the Migration Policy Institute and the former commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Demetrios C. Papdemetriou is a Co-Director of the Migration Policy Institute. Jay Peterzell is a former national security reporter for Time magazine. Michael J. Wishnie is an Associate Professor of Clinical Law at the New York University School of Law.

To order a copy of the report, visit www.migrationpolicy.org or call 1-202-266-1940.