In the aftermath of 9/11, the U.S. government implemented several policies aimed at combating terrorism, but these measures disproportionately targeted Muslim communities. Justified under national security, these policies led to increased surveillance, detainment, deportation, and incarceration of individuals from Muslim-majority countries as well as Black, African, Arab, Middle Eastern, and South Asian communities.
A key legislative change was the USA PATRIOT Act in 2001, which expanded the attorney general’s power to arrest, detain, and deport non-citizens without judicial review. This marked the largest expansion of such powers since the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798.
The creation of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2002 further centralized immigration functions and established agencies such as Customs and Border Protection, Citizenship and Immigration Services, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. These changes were in response to perceived threats from Islamic extremism.
The PATRIOT Act also enabled surveillance of Muslim immigrants, American Muslims, and Islamic religious institutions. It was supplemented by the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS) under the Bush administration, later extended by the Obama administration, which required males from predominantly Muslim countries to register with the government. NSEERS, seen as a precursor to a national Muslim registry, resulted in detentions and deportations without yielding terrorism-related prosecutions.
Subsequent administrations continued these policies. The Obama administration focused on counter-radicalization as part of its counterterrorism strategy. The Trump administration extended many of these policies, often using stereotypes to justify harsh actions against Muslim communities. These restrictions further increased Islamophobia, making immigration more difficult and fostering suspicion and discrimination against Muslim immigrants.
The U.S. immigration system, which includes family-based immigration, employment visas, refugee and asylum programs, and the diversity lottery, has been criticized for its complexity and for discriminatory practices that disproportionately affect immigrants from Muslim-majority countries.
The Trump administration’s Muslim Ban, implemented in January 2017, further complicated matters for Muslim immigrants. The executive orders blocked entry for individuals from countries such as Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The ban’s impact was severe, drastically reducing immigration from these nations and separating families. Although President Biden revoked the ban in 2021, its effects persist, with applicants from previously banned countries facing long delays and increased scrutiny.
The Muslim Ban exemplifies racial and religious profiling. It was justified by the claim that certain states lacked the capacity for information sharing and identity verification. The bans on Yemenis, Syrians, and Rohingya fleeing conflict were especially harsh. Despite the ban’s repeal, delays and additional scrutiny continue for applicants from affected countries disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations.
The impact of these policies is evident in the sharp decline in new lawful permanent residents from Yemen during Trump’s first year in office. Although efforts like the U.S. House of Representatives’ NO BAN Act in 2021 aimed to address these issues, the effects of past policies and continuing Islamophobia shape the experiences of Muslim immigrants.
Another area of concern is the practice of subjecting Muslim applicants to prolonged “administrative processing” for additional security checks, often without clear explanations. This practice not only affects individuals but also has broader implications for U.S. relations with Muslim-majority countries. Skilled individuals may be deterred from immigrating or visiting the United States due to these barriers.
Asylum seekers from Muslim-majority countries also face significant challenges. Migrants fleeing religious persecution or political instability encounter disproportionate rates of incarceration, even when seeking refuge from violence. National Public Radio’s Ari Shapiro and Hamed Aleaziz of the Los Angeles Times have reported on the higher rates of incarceration among asylum seekers in Texas, raising concerns about the fairness of U.S. border enforcement practices.
Immigration judges play a crucial role in determining the fates of immigrants seeking asylum or fighting deportation. However, documented instances of Islamophobic sentiments among some judges raise serious questions about fairness for Muslim immigrants. The lack of diversity among immigration judges, many of whom are appointed by political administrations, exacerbates this issue. A judiciary that does not reflect the diversity of the immigrant population may lack the cultural and geopolitical understanding needed to fairly adjudicate cases involving Muslim immigrants.
Islamophobia plays a significant role in shaping the experiences of Muslim immigrants in the U.S. immigration system. Fear, prejudice, and hatred against Islam and Muslims have been fueled by political rhetoric, media portrayals, and public misconceptions, especially after 9/11. From hate crimes like the 2015 Chapel Hill, North Carolina, shooting of three Muslims to the removal of Ahmed Mohamed from his high school in Irving, Texas, due to his misidentified “bomb” clock, examples of Islamophobia abound. The U.S. government’s focus on counterterrorism has unfairly targeted Muslim communities at home and abroad.
Political rhetoric and media portrayals have often framed Muslim immigrants as security threats. Media outlets disproportionately focus on stories linking Muslims to terrorism, perpetuating harmful stereotypes and creating an environment of fear. This climate of Islamophobia affects public opinion and decision-making processes in the immigration system. Immigration officers, judges, and officials may unknowingly harbor biases that lead to discriminatory treatment of Muslim visa applicants, refugees, and asylum seekers.
Muslim immigrants also face social and economic challenges due to Islamophobia. Discriminatory hiring practices, housing inequality, and social alienation are common. Visible Muslim women, particularly those who wear hijabs, are often targets of harassment and hate crimes, creating an environment of fear and exclusion.
These compounded challenges demonstrate the far-reaching effects of Islamophobia on the lives of Muslim immigrants in the United States. The systemic discrimination they face in the immigration system is only one aspect; integration into American society is hindered by social and economic barriers as well.
Addressing these issues requires a multifaceted approach. Comprehensive immigration reform is essential to reduce disparities faced by immigrants from Muslim-majority countries. Increasing transparency in the visa application process, particularly regarding “administrative processing,” and refining vetting processes for refugees and asylum seekers are crucial steps toward fairness. Safeguards must also be implemented to prevent the reinstatement of discriminatory policies like the Muslim Ban.
Combating Islamophobia in the immigration system requires thorough training on cultural competency, anti-bias, and anti-discrimination for immigration officials and judges. This training can mitigate unconscious biases and ensure fair treatment for Muslim immigrants.
Broader societal change is also necessary to reduce the influence of Islamophobia. Public education campaigns can dispel harmful myths and stereotypes about Muslims, while political leaders and media outlets should promote more balanced portrayals of Muslim communities.
Stronger legal protections against discrimination are essential for Muslim immigrants, both in the immigration system and in society. Robust enforcement of anti-discrimination laws in employment, housing, and public services, along with support for victims of hate crimes or Islamophobic harassment, is crucial. By implementing these solutions, the United States can address the inequities faced by Muslim immigrants and create a more just and inclusive immigration system.
This approach not only benefits Muslim immigrants but also upholds the American values of equality and fairness. A more equitable immigration system strengthens the fabric of American society, fostering diversity, innovation, and cultural richness that have long been hallmarks of the American experience.
Please note: The views expressed herein have not been approved by the House of Delegates, the Board of Governors, the Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice or the Human Rights Editorial Board of the American Bar Association and, accordingly, should not be construed as representing the policy of the American Bar Association. They are the views of the individual authors themselves in their personal capacities.
