HSE 630 Week 2 Discussion: Homeland Security and Immigration, Policy Influence and Reducing Profiling

HSE 630 Week 2 Discussion: Homeland Security and Immigration, Policy Influence and Reducing Profiling Risks

We consider the U.S. a nation of immigrants. With this perspective in focus, discuss:

• How has immigration influenced policies associated with homeland security?
• What practices would you recommend to mitigate the risks and dangers of profiling in the immigration and naturalization process?

Your initial post must be at least 500 words, address all prompts with analysis and course concepts, integrate at least three resources from the course modules and use APA 7th edition citations with a References list.

Original example for study purposes (about 570 words). Replace or add sources so that at least three come from your course modules.

How Immigration Has Influenced Homeland Security Policy

Because immigration and border management determine who enters and remains in the country, they have been central to homeland security since the September 11, 2001, attacks. The 9/11 Commission found that the hijackers had entered the United States legally on visas and that weaknesses in visa screening, border inspection and information sharing allowed them to travel, which led the Commission to call terrorist travel a vulnerability as important as terrorist finance (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, 2004). Congress responded through the Homeland Security Act of 2002, which abolished the Immigration and Naturalization Service and divided its functions among three Department of Homeland Security (DHS) components: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for benefits and naturalization, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for interior enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection for ports of entry and borders (DHS, n.d.).

Since then, immigration policy has increasingly been designed as a security tool. Examples include biometric entry screening, expanded watchlist checks, visa security units at consulates, the REAL ID Act’s identity standards and information-sharing programs that link local arrests to immigration databases. More recently, Executive Order 14161 (2025) directed agencies to identify countries with deficient vetting and screening information, and a June 2025 proclamation fully suspended entry for nationals of 12 countries and partially suspended entry for 7 others, citing vetting deficiencies, visa overstay rates and, for some countries, terrorism concerns (Wilson, 2025). These measures show how immigration policy has shifted from managing labor and family migration toward managing risk. The challenge is that security goals can conflict with the nation’s identity as a nation of immigrants and with civil liberties, especially when screening relies on nationality or religion rather than individual conduct.

Mitigating the Risks and Dangers of Profiling

Profiling based on race, ethnicity, religion or national origin is dangerous because it is both unjust and ineffective. It treats entire communities as suspects, wastes investigative resources on people who pose no threat and erodes the trust that immigrant communities need to report crimes and cooperate with investigators. The U.S. Department of Justice’s (2023) guidance on the use of protected characteristics by federal law enforcement prohibits relying on generalized stereotypes, but critics note that it still leaves broad discretion, particularly in national security and border contexts. I recommend five practices for the immigration and naturalization process:

1. Use behavior- and intelligence-based indicators. Screening criteria should rely on specific, credible information about an individual’s conduct or connections, not on nationality, religion or appearance alone.
2. Adopt and publish a DHS-wide anti-profiling policy aligned with the DOJ guidance, with clear limits on the use of protected characteristics at ports of entry and in benefit adjudications.
3. Audit outcomes and algorithms. Regularly analyze secondary inspection referrals, denials and automated risk scores by nationality and other characteristics to detect disparate impact, and validate automated tools for accuracy and bias.
4. Train officers in implicit bias, cultural competence and interviewing techniques, and supervise discretionary decisions.
5. Strengthen accountability and redress through independent oversight, such as DHS’s Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and the Inspector General, and through accessible complaint and appeal processes, such as the DHS Traveler Redress Inquiry Program.

These practices align with homeland security’s goal of focusing scarce resources on genuine threats. An immigration system that screens rigorously and treats people fairly is more secure, because it preserves public trust and keeps attention on the evidence that matters.

References

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. (2004). The 9/11 Commission report. U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (n.d.). Creation of the Department of Homeland Security. https://www.dhs.gov/creation-department-homeland-security

U.S. Department of Justice. (2023). Guidance for federal law enforcement agencies regarding the use of race, ethnicity, gender, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. https://www.justice.gov

Wilson, J. H. (2025, June 9). Presidential proclamation of June 4, 2025, restricting the entry of certain foreign nationals (CRS Insight IN12561). Congressional Research Service.

More model assignments posted today

• African American classic newsletter
• Texas 2021 outages infrastructure briefing
• HSE 614 risk management elements
• HSE 614 most critical sector
• Remember the Titans team dynamics

Expert Help With This Assignment — On Your Terms