About Us
Immigration Systems Research Institute
The Immigration Systems Research Institute is an independent policy research initiative dedicated to improving the administrative performance, clarity, and practical effectiveness of the United States immigration system.
Our work does not begin with ideology, and it does not end with politics. It begins with process.
Administrative Analysis, Not Advocacy
The United States operates the largest and most complex immigration adjudication structure in the world. Over time, public debate has increasingly focused on moral arguments and electoral narratives, while the operational mechanics of the system — officer workload, incentive structures, processing behavior, and administrative capacity — receive far less attention. Our institute exists to study those mechanics.
We analyze immigration through the perspective of administration rather than advocacy.
This means examining how rules function after they are written:
- how applicants behave under them,
- how agencies must process them,
- how states experience their impact,
- and how incentives shape outcomes regardless of political intention.
A Non-Partisan Administrative Approach
Immigration policy affects communities across the full political spectrum. Border states, interior labor markets, agricultural regions, urban centers, and rural economies all experience the system differently. Cultural expectations, economic needs, and demographic realities vary widely across the country.
For this reason, our research does not attempt to advance a political position. Instead, we evaluate whether a regulatory structure works in practice for the United States as a whole.
"A rule should be judged by what it causes people to do — not only by what it intends."
Policies designed without considering behavioral response often produce results opposite of their goals. When incentives conflict with statutory purpose, administrative backlog, informal economies, and procedural delay inevitably follow. Identifying and correcting these structural mismatches is the focus of our work.
Focus on Agency Operations
We study immigration primarily from the operational perspective of adjudicating agencies, particularly the resource constraints faced by officers responsible for processing applications.
Every filing creates workload.
Every queue creates delay.
Every incentive creates behavior.
Our research examines how regulations influence:
Rather than evaluating immigration solely as a legal question or humanitarian question, we evaluate it as an administrative system — one that must remain functional in order to remain fair.
Law-Centered Reform
Our proposals operate within existing statutory authority whenever possible. We do not assume congressional overhaul as a prerequisite for improvement.
Many inefficiencies in the immigration system are not caused by the absence of law, but by the interaction of overlapping procedures that were designed independently over decades. Adjusting regulatory mechanisms, clarifying eligibility structures, and aligning incentives with statutory purpose can often produce measurable improvements without altering underlying legal protections.
This approach preserves the integrity of immigration law while improving its execution.
National Perspective
The United States is not administratively uniform. States differ in labor demand, demographic composition, public resources, and community expectations.
A functioning federal immigration system must therefore operate predictably across all of them — from high-density metropolitan regions to agricultural economies and small industrial cities.
Our work evaluates how federal procedures scale across different environments and whether a rule maintains consistency in outcomes nationwide. A regulation that works only in one type of region does not solve a national administrative problem.
Purpose
The goal of this institute is not to advocate for more immigration or less immigration. The goal is to support a system that can reliably distinguish between categories defined in law and process them within reasonable time and cost.
When administrative systems function, policy debates remain democratic. When administrative systems collapse, outcomes are determined by delay rather than law.
Our research aims to ensure decisions occur because the law was applied — not because the system was overwhelmed.
Commitment
We publish structured proposals intended to assist agencies, analysts, and the public in understanding how regulatory design influences real-world outcomes. Every recommendation is evaluated according to three criteria:
Administrative Feasibility
Can the proposal be implemented within existing agency capacity, infrastructure, and legal authority?
Behavioral Predictability
Does the design account for how applicants, employers, and officers will actually respond to the incentives created?
Consistency with Statutory Authority
Does the proposal operate within existing law, preserving legal protections while improving execution?
Administrative Analysis • Regulatory Structure • System Efficiency