Tag:Immigration
Regulating Childhood: Mass Deportations of Unaccompanied Minors
Undocumented minors are children, and the federal government should treat them as such. The attitude and justifications for harsh immigration policies are deeply rooted in the United States’ history along the Southern border and remain all too prevalent in today’s “tough on crime” approach to immigration. The Trump administration has repeatedly referred to undocumented immigrants as “criminals,” even though more than half of the 43,759 people held in ICE detention facilities have no criminal record. Yet, undocumented children appear to be the latest target of the president’s anti-immigrant crusade.
Mass Deportation and the Fall of Immigration Detention Regulations
As the Trump administration ushers in a new era of mass deportation and hysteria, “sanctuary” communities like Chicago are more important now than ever. The term “sanctuary” generally refers to states, counties or cities that have policies that limit the extent to which a local officials will cooperate with federal agencies’ efforts to deport undocumented persons. Recently, regulations concerning detention and deportations of undocumented immigrants have rapidly devolved, along with what protections they offered to these communities. Previous regulations were similarly deferential to federal enforcement agencies, particularly U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). However, the current administration is actively working to broaden federal authorities’ power to deport immigrants who are not lawfully in the U.S. and have been accused, rather than convicted, of crimes. One way the administration seeks to do so is by loosening its regulation of the methods ICE may use to conduct arrests as well as the role state and local law enforcement may play in such operations. Biden administration’s discontinuing the practice of mass immigration sweeps at worksites such as factories is just one of the limitations that has been discarded. This leaves already fragile protections for undocumented persons to the wayside, resulting in unnecessary harm and suffering to thousands of undocumented persons and citizens.
Chicago’s One System Initiative: Merging the Homelessness and Forced Migration Response Services
Since August 2022, Chicago has seen a record influx of new arrivals, with nearly 47,000 individuals seeking asylum in Illinois from the southern U.S. border. In response to this surge of new Chicagoans, the city and state launched the One System Initiative, an ambitious effort to integrate the systems serving Chicagoans experiencing homelessness and new arrivals. By aligning resources and streamlining services, the initiative aims to enhance the city’s overall homeless response system. Such integration must also comply with various federal, state, and local regulations concerning eligibility requirements, funding restrictions, and documentation demands.
Bars and Barriers: DHS Proposed Rule Permits Application of Mandatory Bars During Credible Fear Screenings
On May 13, 2024 the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking which would allow asylum officers (“AOs”) to consider the applicability of certain mandatory bars to asylum and statutory withholding of removal during credible fear screenings. The proposed rule has garnered significant support and opposition from several groups and organizations, but it marks an unprecedented change to the asylum-seeking process that could create additional barriers to relief for asylum seekers.
The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and Its Failure to Protect Our Undocumented Communities
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has proposed new regulations regarding DACA and is accepting comments on the proposed rule. USCIS claims that the new regulations will preserve and fortify the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy. As well as respond to President Biden’s memorandum from January 20, 2021, where Biden states in support of DACA, that “these immigrants (DACA recipients) should not be a priority for removal based on humanitarian concerns, and that work authorization will enable them to support themselves, and contribute to our economy, while they remain(in the U.S.)” USCIS further claims that DACA has been economically and socially beneficial to undocumented communities. It reiterates their “consistent judgment” that DACA recipients should not be a priority for removal citing Secretary Napolitano’s 2012 memorandum that DACA recipients lacked the intent to violate the law as children. Further, “removing productive young people (unless justified)” is not a prudent way to spend border resources. The agency continues to provide that the proposed regulation does not provide lawful status or path to citizenship. Despite the use of language that speciously centers on DACA recipients, the proposed provisions are at best superficial and continue to leave undocumented young people in a state of uncertainty.
The Ableist and Racist Public Charge Rule
The Public Charge Rule perpetuates anti-immigrant sentiment and keeps poor, disabled migrants who were often Black, Brown, and ethnically oppressed out of the United States. It makes pathways to citizenship contingent upon wealth and the absence of disability. As the Autistic Self Advocacy Network puts it, the Public Charge Rule is a “clear echo of the racist and ableist policies of the eugenics era.”
Texas Abortion Ban: The State-Sanctioned Killing of Poor Black and Brown Pregnant People
Texas Senate Bill 8 (“SB 8”), also known as “The Texas Heartbeat Act,” went into effect on September 1, 2021, banning abortions after six weeks of pregnancy or after the fetus’s heartbeat has been detected. Additionally, it awards any civilian who successfully reports someone for aiding, abetting, or performing an abortion after the six-week mark with $10,000. The United States Supreme Court, as Justice Sotomayor described, “buried their heads in the sand” and decided not to comment on the abortion ban’s constitutionality under the guise of a technicality. Historically, abortion bans have been death penalties to many people seeking abortions and contribute up to thirteen percent of pregnancy-related deaths. Abortion bans do not reduce the number of abortions, but rather reduce the number of safe abortions while increasing avoidable deaths. Abortion bans work as a form of dangerous regulatory mechanisms that function as the state-sanctioned killing of poor people who are often Black, Brown, and indigenous who cannot travel outside the state to receive care.
Proposed Public Charge Intended for Immigrants but will Impose on Health Care
Every time we turn on the news, someone is either talking about immigration reform or health care reform. Health care and immigration are two major areas that President Trump promised to address and is attempting to tackle within his first two years in office. Although most would not consider that these two issues would overlap, in today’s American health care system, Americans need immigrants. Immigrants contribute a great deal to our medical research, make up a large percentage of our health care providers, and subsidize health insurance premiums.