The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it tentatively selected 70 applicants to receive over $735 million from the Clean Heavy-Duty Vehicles Grant Program for the purchase and implementation of zero-emission heavy duty vehicles, including electric school buses.

EPA stated on Dec. 11 that the applicants span 27 states, three Tribal Nations, and one U.S. territory.

The School Bus Sub Program portion of the grant includes $490 million to fund new zero-emission electric school buses and associated infrastructure and looks to deliver approximately 70 percent of total funding to school bus replacement projects. The funds being awarded will go toward the purchase of over 1,600 electric school buses.

EPA also said it will be working with the selected applicants to finalize award details and “currently anticipates finalizing awards in early calendar year 2025 once all legal and administrative requirements are satisfied.” Depending on the scale of each individual project, implementation will occur over the next two to three years.

Some of the grant fund allocation for zero-emission buses and infrastructure include an anticipated $35 million to Boston Public Schools to replace 125 diesel and propane school buses with electric school buses as well as purchase chargers for the buses. Multiple school districts in California are slated to receive funds. Over $20.3 million is destined for Los Angeles Unified School District to replace 50 fossil fuel-powered school buses and $15.1 million to Oakland Unified School District to replace 60 of its buses with electric school buses.

A full list of tentative applicants and project fund amounts can be found here.

---

Related: EPA Announces Nearly $900M Awarded in Latest Clean School Bus Rebate
Related: Preparing for Electric School Bus Infrastructure
Related: (STN Podcast E221) EV Prognostication, Garage Star Perspective on NY Electric Pioneer Suffolk

The post EPA Awards Clean Heavy-Duty Vehicles Grant Program Funds Nationwide appeared first on School Transportation News.

Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib, left, speaks at a press conference hosted by immigrant youth, allies and advocates outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2024. (Photo by Shauneen Miranda/States Newsroom)

WASHINGTON — In the crucial last month before President Joe Biden leaves office, immigrants and allies on Tuesday urged the president to offer protections for immigrant communities before Donald Trump is inaugurated.

The president-elect has promised the largest deportation in U.S. history, stoking fear and uncertainty among undocumented immigrants and immigration advocates over a sweeping platform that marked the core of Trump’s GOP presidential campaign.

Speaking near the U.S. Capitol, the “Home is Here” campaign featured immigrant youth, allies and advocates demanding Biden take executive action.

The national coalition, which fights to protect immigrant communities, also urged Congress not to boost funding for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection during the lame-duck session in a way that would aid Trump in carrying out mass deportations. Members of Congress are expected to vote this week on a stopgap spending bill that would fund the government through mid-March.

Immigrant youth, allies and advocates traveled to Washington, D.C., from across the country, including states such as Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, New York and Utah, to rally and meet with members of Congress about their demands.

Claudia Quiñonez, organizing director of United We Dream, the nation’s largest immigrant youth-led network, said “before the keys to the White House are handed over to Trump, before a new Congress takes office, this lame-duck period is (a) critical window for our members in Congress and President Biden to leave it all on the field.”

Quiñonez, who is also a co-chair of the Home is Here campaign, said there is “no underestimating the length Trump is willing to go to fulfill his pledges for mass deportation in raiding our schools, our workplaces, our hospitals and our churches.”

U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaib also voiced her concerns Tuesday over the president-elect’s immigration plans.

“We cannot underestimate, as you all know, what will unfold the moment Trump takes office in January, and we need as many people as possible working to resist this hateful agenda,” the Michigan Democrat said.

Tlaib noted that Biden “still has power to take immediate executive action to protect our immigrant communities.”

She also said “we must continue to work incredibly hard, not only to outwork the hate, but to really promote love and justice within our communities.”

Among its priorities, the Home is Here campaign aims to protect Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program recipients. A federal court will determine the program’s legal fate.

The Obama-era program was created in 2012 and designed to protect children who were brought into the country illegally from deportation.

Trump tried ending DACA during his first term.

During an NBC News interview earlier this month, Trump did not give specifics on what he intends to do about the program but said that he “will work with the Democrats on a plan.”

Immigration groups on Tuesday also expressed worry over the uncertainty of Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, which allows migrants in countries with unsafe conditions to legally reside and work in the United States.

Trump sought to end TPS for multiple countries throughout his first administration. 

Photo by Gregory Conniff for Wisconsin Examiner

If President-elect Donald Trump follows through on his pledge to deport millions of immigrants, it could upend the economies of states where farming and other food-related industries are crucial — and where labor shortages abound.

Immigrants make up about two-thirds of the nation’s crop farmworkers, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, and roughly 2 in 5 of them are not legally authorized to work in the United States.

Agricultural industries such as meatpacking, dairy farms and poultry and livestock farms also rely heavily on immigrants.

“We have five to six employees that do the work that nobody else will do. We wouldn’t survive without them,” said Bruce Lampman, who owns Lampman Dairy Farm, in Bruneau, Idaho. His farm, which has been in the family three decades, has 350 cows producing some 26,000 pounds of milk a day.

“My business and every agriculture business in the U.S. will be crippled if they want to get rid of everybody who does the work,” said Lampman, adding that his workers are worried about what’s to come.

Anita Alves Pena, a Colorado State University professor of economics who studies immigration, noted that many agricultural employers already can’t find enough laborers. Without farm subsidies or other protections to make up for the loss of immigrant workers, she said, the harm to state economies could be significant.

“Farmers across the country, producers in a lot of different parts, are often talking about labor shortages — and that’s even with the current status quo of having a fairly high percentage of unauthorized individuals in the workforce,” Pena said. “A policy like this, if it was not coupled with something else, would exacerbate that.”

Employers have a hard time hiring enough farm laborers because such workers generally are paid low wages for arduous work.

In addition to hiring immigrant laborers who are in the country illegally, agricultural employers rely on the federal H-2A visa program. H-2A visas usually are for seasonal work, often for about six to 10 months. However, they can be extended for up to three years before a worker must return to their home country.

Employers must pay H-2A workers a state-specific minimum wage and provide no-cost transportation and housing. Still, employers’ applications for H-2A visas have soared in the past 18 years, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, a trend reflecting the shortage of U.S.-born laborers willing to do the work. The number of H-2A positions has surged from just over 48,000 in 2005 to more than 378,000 in 2023.

But agricultural employers that operate year-round, such as poultry, dairy and livestock producers, can’t use the seasonal visa to fill gaps, according to the USDA.

Farmers also employ foreign nationals who have “temporary protected status” under a 1990 law that allows immigrants to remain if the U.S. has determined their home countries are unsafe because of violence or other reasons. There are about 1.2 million people in the U.S. under the program or eligible for it, from countries including El Salvador, Ethiopia, Haiti, Honduras, Lebanon and Ukraine. Many have been here for decades, and Trump has threatened to end the program.

Support for the program

Immigration advocates want a pathway for H-2A workers to gain permanent legal status, and agricultural trade organizations are pushing for an expansion of the H-2A program to include year-round operations.

The National Milk Producers Federation says it’s too early to say how it would cope with mass deportations under the Trump administration. But the group states it “strongly supports efforts to pass agriculture labor reform that provides permanent legal status to current workers and their families and gives dairy farmers access to a workable guestworker program.”

Immigrants make up 51% of labor at dairy farms across states, and farms that employ immigrants produce nearly 80% of the nation’s milk supply, according to the organization.

“Foreign workers are important to the success of U.S. dairy, and we will work closely with members of Congress and federal officials to show the importance of foreign workers to the dairy industry and farm communities,” Jaime Castaneda, the group’s executive vice president for policy development and strategy, wrote in an email.

Adam Croissant, the former vice president of research and development at yogurt company Chobani, which has manufacturing plants in Idaho and New York, said he’s seen a lot of misinformation around immigrants’ workforce contributions.

“The dairy industry as a whole understands that without immigrant labor, the dairy industry doesn’t exist. It’s as simple as that,” said Croissant.

Tom Super, a spokesperson for the National Chicken Council, lambasted U.S. immigration policy and said the poultry industry “wants a stable, legal, and permanent workforce.”

“The chicken industry is heavily affected by our nation’s immigration policy or, more pointedly, lack thereof. … The system is broken, and Washington has done nothing to fix it,” Super wrote in an email.

Changes ahead?

But major changes to the H-2A visa program are unlikely to happen before deportations begin. In an interview with NBC News’ “Meet the Press” over the weekend, Trump repeated his promise to start deporting some immigrants almost immediately.

He said he plans to begin with convicted criminals, but would then move to other immigrants. “We’re starting with the criminals, and we’ve got to do it. And then we’re starting with the others, and we’re going to see how it goes.”

Some farmers still hope that Trump’s actions won’t match his rhetoric. But “hoping isn’t a great business plan,” said Rick Naerebout, CEO of the Idaho Dairymen’s Association. “Our ability to feed ourselves as a country is completely jeopardized if you do see the mass deportations.”

If the deportations do happen, agricultural workers will disappear faster than they can be replaced, experts say.

“The H-2A program will not expand instantly to fill the gap. So, that’s going to be a problem,” said Jeffrey Dorfman, a professor of agricultural economics at North Carolina State University who was Georgia’s state economist from 2019 to 2023.

In Georgia, agriculture is an $83.6 billion industry that supports more than 323,000 jobs. It is one of the five states most reliant on the federal H-2A visa program, depending on those workers to fill about 60% of agricultural jobs.

Dorfman argued that even the fear of deportation will have an impact on the workforce.

“When farmworkers hear about ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] raids on a nearby farm, lots of them disappear. Even the legal ones often disappear for a few days. So, if everybody just gets scared and self-deports, just goes back home, I think that would be the worst disruption,” said Dorfman, adding that even more jobs would need to be filled if the administration revokes temporary protected status.

Antonio De Loera-Brust, communications director for the farmworker labor union United Farm Workers, said the nation’s focus should be on protecting workers, no matter their legal status.

“They deserve a lot better than just not getting deported,” he said. “They deserve better wages, they deserve labor rights, they deserve citizenship.”

And though economists and the agriculture industry have said that mass deportations could raise grocery store prices, De Loera-Brust called that particular argument a sign of “moral weakness.”

“As if the worst thing about hundreds of thousands of people getting separated from their families was going to be that consumers would have to pay more for a bag of strawberries or a bag of baby carrots,” De Loera-Brust said. “There’s a moral gap there.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Stateline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Scott S. Greenberger for questions: info@stateline.org.

Packages of Mifepristone tablets are displayed at a family planning clinic on April 13, 2023 in Rockville, Maryland. (Photo illustration by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump has several choices to make in the coming months about whether his second administration will keep access to contraception and abortion as it is now or implement changes.

While Trump cannot on his own enact nationwide laws or abortion bans without Congress, he and the people he picks for key posts throughout the federal government will have significant influence on reproductive rights nationwide.

During Trump’s first term in office he barred health care organizations that perform or refer patients for abortions from receiving Title X family planning grants, even though there’s a moratorium on using federal funds for abortions unless it’s the result of rape or incest, or the life of the woman is at risk.

Alina Salganicoff, senior vice president and director for women’s health policy at the nonpartisan health research organization KFF, said on a call with reporters Friday that about a quarter of providers withdrew or were disqualified from receiving federal family planning grants as a result of that policy.

“The Title X program basically funds family planning services for low-income people,” Salganicoff explained. “It’s basically a small program, it’s around under $300 million — but it is a critical program to people who don’t otherwise have insurance.”

Abortions as stabilizing care

Trump will also have to decide whether to leave in place guidance from the Biden administration that says a federal law from the 1980s protects health care providers who perform abortions as stabilizing care during an emergency that would affect a woman’s health or life.

That law, known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, became one point of disagreement between the Biden administration and Republican states that implemented abortion bans or strict restrictions after the Supreme Court ended the nationwide right to an abortion.

U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra wrote in a letter released in July 2022 that under the federal “law, no matter where you live, women have the right to emergency care — including abortion care.”

EMTALA is at the center of an ongoing lawsuit between the Biden administration and Idaho over that state’s abortion law. Oral arguments in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals are set for early December.

Abortion pill

The future of medication abortion, a two-drug regimen approved for up to 10 weeks gestation that’s used in about 63% of abortions nationwide, will be another area the Trump administration could alter without congressional approval.

Salganicoff said there’s no way to know just yet if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will seek to change prescribing guidelines for medication abortion or revoke the 2000 approval of mifepristone altogether.

“We don’t know whether they’re going to actually review the approval, but I will tell you that it is likely that they will revisit the conditions in which medication abortions, which now account for nearly two-thirds of all abortions in this country, can be provided,” Salganicoff said.

The Trump administration, she said, is likely to focus on revisions made during the Biden administration that allow doctors or other qualified health care providers to prescribe the two-drug medication abortion regimen via telehealth and then have mifepristone and misoprostol mailed to the patient.

Salganicoff anticipates anti-abortion organizations will also encourage the Trump administration to address recent findings from the We Count Project, showing 1 in 10 abortions take place after medication abortion is mailed to people in states with bans or significant restrictions from states that have shield laws.

“This FDA protocol is legal to do that, but clearly this is going to be a target,” she said.

Mailing of abortion medication

The Comstock Act, an anti-obscenity law from the late 19th century that once banned the mailing of boxing photographs, pornography and contraception, will also be front and center after Trump takes the oath of office on Jan. 20.

The law, which is still on the books despite not being enforced in decades, could potentially allow the U.S. Postal Service to prevent the mailing of abortion medications or any other instrument or tool used in abortions.

“The Biden administration’s Department of Justice did a review and said that they are not going to enforce Comstock,” Salganicoff said. “Project 2025 sees it very differently, and even though President-elect Trump has said that he is not going to enforce Comstock, it’s not clear, and there will likely be a lot of pressure to do that.”

Project 2025 is a policy map for a Trump presidency published by the Heritage Foundation. Trump has disavowed any connection with it, although former members of his first administration helped develop it.

Salganicoff said enforcing the Comstock Act would affect access to medication abortion throughout the country, even in states that have reinforced reproductive rights during the last two years.

“Clearly that’s going to tee up a lot of litigation and challenges,” Salganicoff said.

Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, said during the call that the Trump administration’s possible elevation of people who spread misinformation or disinformation could lead to more confusion about research-based health care.

“I think one thing, particularly with the rise in prominence of RFK Jr., you know, is the potential for misinformation,” Levitt said, referring to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., a prominent vaccine opponent who endorsed Trump and campaigned extensively with him.

“We turn to the government for reliable data, public health information and scientific information,” Levitt said. “And there’s the potential now, for the government to be not only not an effective source for health information, but in fact, an accelerant for misinformation.” 

A woman holds a sign calling for “Mass deportation now!” at the 2024 Republican National Convention in Milwaukee. President-elect Donald Trump has pledged to conduct mass deportations of millions of immigrants in the country without authorization. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom.)

WASHINGTON — Immigration advocates and civil rights groups are preparing to take on President-elect Donald Trump’s campaign promises to  crack down on immigration, from reviving controversial policies of his first term to enacting mass deportations.  

Trump has pledged to end, immediately after retaking office, parole programs that have allowed immigrants to work and live in the country legally. In those humanitarian parole programs, as of 2021, there were more than 1 million immigrants with temporary protections.

What is likely to immediately follow is the re-implementation of his previous immigration policies, such as bans on allowing people from predominantly Muslim countries into the United States and reinstating the “Remain in Mexico” policy that requires asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while they await their cases.

Immigration groups are preparing for those policies and the ones to follow ahead of Inauguration Day.

Sirine Shebaya, executive director of the National Immigration Project, laid out a sobering reality.  

“We recognize that many are feeling terrified about what the next four years will bring,” she said in a statement. “While we cannot stop all the harms from coming to pass, we say to everyone facing harm: we are here to do everything in our power to support and protect each other.”

The American Civil Liberties Union, which was at the forefront of challenging some of Trump’s harshest immigration policies during his first term, said on social media it is prepared for legal challenges beginning on Trump’s first day in office. 

Greisa Martínez Rosas, executive director of the largest immigrant youth organization, United We Dream, said in a statement that with Trump promising to plan mass deportations, they are “clear eyed about the fight ahead.”

“We will use and grow our power to new heights, building the largest pro-immigrant movement this country has ever seen, to fight back against white nationalism, and to enact a vision for the future that honors our values of a pluralistic democracy where everyone can live and thrive without fear,” Martínez Rosas said.

Deportations

Some immediate deportations could include those already in Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody, which was 37,395 as of September.

It could also include expanding expedited removals, which means if a person lacking permanent legal status is in the country for two years without a court hearing or any type of authorization, they can be deported without a hearing before a judge.

That type of removal is limited to 100 miles from a border. However, during the first Trump administration, that zone was expanded to the rest of the country. A second Trump administration could do that again.

The Migration Policy Institute, an immigration think tank, has estimated that “the expansion of expedited removal to the U.S. interior could apply to as many as 288,000 people.”

Tom Homan, who served as acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement from 2017 to 2018, told CBS News recently that mass deportation would be targeted.

“It’s not gonna be a mass sweep of neighborhoods,” he said. “They’ll be targeted arrests. We’ll know who we’re going to arrest, where we’re most likely to find ‘em based on numerous, you know, investigative processes.”

Funding

At issue would also be the cost of mass deportations.

Trump’s core campaign promise to enact mass deportations would be a costly undertaking that needs congressional approval — something that might be easier if the incoming president is granted control of both chambers.

The American Immigration Council, in a conservative estimate, found that it would cost $968 billion to remove the roughly 13 million immigrants in the country without authorization over the next ten years.

It would cost the government $89.3 billion in arrests, $167.8 billion to detain massive amounts of people, $34 billion on legal processing and $24 billion on removals, according to the analysis.

That funding would need to be appropriated through Congress.

As of Thursday morning, it was unclear if Trump would deal with a divided Congress or united GOP control. Republicans have flipped the Senate, and though there are still too many House races left to project control of the chamber, the GOP was inching toward a thin majority.

Economic impact

Economic experts have warned of the consequences of removing millions of workers.

Jeremy Robbins, the executive director of the American Immigration Council, tried to break down the economic effects of mass deportations.

“Should any president choose to pursue mass deportation, it would come at an extraordinary cost to the government while also devastating the economy,” Robbins said in a Wednesday statement.

“It’s critical that policymakers and the American public understand what this would involve: tens of billions of tax-payer dollars, already-strained industries devastated, millions of people locked up in detention, and thousands of families torn apart causing widespread terror and chaos in communities across the country.”

In 2022, households led by undocumented immigrants paid $75.6 billion in total taxes, according to the American Immigration Council. It’s estimated that about 4.8% of the U.S. workforce consists of unauthorized immigrants, according to the Pew Research Center. 

Reading Time: 6 minutes

Fernanda Jimenez, a 24-year-old Racine resident, came to the United States from Mexico with her mother and siblings when she was just 5 years old. It’s the only home she can remember.

For almost a decade, Jimenez has been protected from deportation by the federal Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program, launched under the Obama administration. The program allows people who came to the country illegally as children to get work permits and continue living in America.

Earlier this year, Jimenez graduated from Alverno College in Milwaukee. She currently works as a grant writer, helping nonprofits apply for funding. But she’s also in the process of applying to law school.

“I like helping nonprofits get funding to do the work that we need in our country and especially our communities, but I’m more passionate about community organizing,” she said. “I’d like to eventually use legal skills after law school for community organizing.”

Jimenez has big dreams, but she says she’s been feeling a looming anxiety since former President Donald Trump won his bid to return to the White House in this year’s presidential race.

She was still in high school when Trump was first elected in 2016, but she says she still remembers feeling “terrified” about what his election would mean for her parents who don’t have permanent legal status and what it would mean for DACA’s future.

Those fears have come roaring back in recent weeks. 

“Our community is terrified. They’re uncertain of their futures, they’re concerned for their family members who are undocumented and not protected under DACA,” Jimenez said. “A lot of naturalized citizens are concerned as well. The mass deportation threat is being taken seriously.”

On the campaign trail, Trump promised to lead the largest deportation effort in U.S. history. Shortly after the election, he announced that Tom Homan, former acting director of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, would serve as his administration’s “border czar.”

In interviews with Fox News last week, Homan said he would prioritize deporting people who threaten public safety or pose risks to national security. But he also told the network that anyone in the country illegally is “not off the table,” and the administration would perform workplace immigration raids. 

Immigrant rights group plans organizing efforts

Following Trump’s reelection, Voces de La Frontera, a Milwaukee-based immigrant rights group, has been holding community meetings in Green Bay, Milwaukee and Dane County to plan next steps, according to Christine Neumann-Ortiz, the organization’s founding executive director.

She said many of the immigrants in Wisconsin without permanent legal status are fearful of the prospect of mass deportations, but she doesn’t believe they will leave the country preemptively. Rather, she said they may leave Wisconsin for states that provide more protections to immigrants.

Neumann-Ortiz said Voces is using the regional meetings to brainstorm ways it can organize around protecting immigrants without permanent legal status. She said the group plans to raise awareness through mass strikes, protests and civil disobedience. 

“We really are going to have to very strongly be a movement that stands for human decency, solidarity, and we’re going to have to do that in the streets,” she said. 

Neumann-Ortiz also said she believes most Trump voters cast ballots for him because of economic concerns, not because they wanted to see people forcibly removed from their communities.

“I do think as things unfold, there’s going to be shock waves that are going to happen that are going to have many people open their eyes, regret their decisions and see what they can do to help,” she said.

David Najera, Hispanic outreach coordinator for the Republican Party of Wisconsin, does not share the concerns about mass deportations.

“My parents came from Mexico and Texas. They came the right way, and that’s the way I’d like to see people come,” he said.

Najera said he supports Trump’s immigration policies, citing concerns about crime, infectious disease and government resources.

“The immigrants are just overwhelming the hospitals, schools and everything else, and taking our tax money,” Najera said. “I’m not saying they’re all bad, but there’s a majority of them that are just getting out of their jails over there in different countries, and coming here with bad intentions.”

Multiple studies have shown immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-born Americans. And Wisconsin’s immigrants without permanent legal status paid $240 million in federal, state and local taxes in 2022, according to the American Immigration Council.

How are Wisconsin immigration attorneys advising clients?

Marc Christopher, an immigration attorney based in Milwaukee, represents clients in federal immigration court who are facing deportation or seeking asylum. Christopher said he doesn’t expect the Trump administration’s deportation effort to be limited to people with serious criminal convictions or those who pose security concerns.

He said he expects increased targeting of individuals who haven’t committed crimes or have been charged with minor offenses, like driving without a license. Immigrants living in Wisconsin without proof of citizenship or legal residency can’t get driver’s licenses.

“What I’m telling my clients to do is make sure that you follow the law to a tee,” Christopher said. “If you do not have a driver’s license, do not drive. If you can have someone else drive you to work or drive your children to school, make sure and do that because that’s the most common way that they get thrown into the immigration court process.”

Aissa Olivarez, managing attorney for the Community Immigration Law Center in Madison, said she expects the incoming administration to expand the use of “expedited removal.” It’s a process that allows the government to deport people without presenting their case to an immigration judge if the person has been in the country for less than two years.

“I’m also advising people to start gathering proof that they’ve been here for more than two years — phone bills, light bills, leases, school information — to be able to show in case they are stopped and questioned by immigration authorities,” Olivarez said.

Second Trump term reignites fears over DACA’s future, impact on mixed-status families

Christopher and Olivarez both said the DACA program, and other federal programs giving immigrants temporary protected statuses, could end in the coming years.

Trump previously tried to end the DACA program, but it was upheld in a 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision with Chief Justice John Roberts siding with four liberal justices. The current court has a 6-3 conservative majority, meaning Roberts would no longer be the deciding vote.

“It’s (DACA) all but assuredly going to be found unconstitutional by the current Supreme Court,” Christopher said of the DACA program. 

Jimenez, the DACA recipient from Racine, said she’s afraid being a participant in the program will make her a target for deportation by the federal government.

“We have to provide, every two years, an updated information application of where we live, our biometrics, our pictures, and they have to be recent pictures,” she said. “They have our entire information. And that’s really where our fear is at. They know who we are. They know we’re undocumented.”

Immigrant rights advocates are also concerned that a mass deportation effort could devastate the estimated 28,000 families in Wisconsin with mixed-immigration status. Those families include households where one spouse may be a U.S. citizen married to someone who doesn’t have permanent legal status, or where the parents of U.S. citizen children lack legal status.

Jimenez said her brother is part of a mixed-status family. She says he is a DACA recipient, his girlfriend is a legal resident, and his children are U.S. citizens.

“If he is to be deported, his kids would suffer the most not having their father with them, and my parents, who I fear (for) the most, have no protection,” she said. “They have to work. They have to drive to work. They have to drive without a license.”

What could a second Trump term mean for asylum seekers in Wisconsin?

Christopher, the immigration attorney from Milwaukee, said individuals seeking asylum in Wisconsin are in the country legally as they wait to make their case to the government that they should be granted asylum in the United States. 

Under the last Trump administration, Christopher said the federal government narrowed the qualifications to be granted asylum. He said the previous Trump administration made it so those fleeing cartel or gang violence in their home country did not qualify and rolled back protections for those fleeing gender-based violence.

If Trump tightens restrictions on the qualifications on asylum again, Christopher said those new restrictions would apply to people already in Wisconsin waiting to make their case to immigration officials.

“You’re not protected by the rules at the time that you apply,” he said. “It’s going to be a major shift.”

Byron Chavez, a 28-year-old asylum seeker from Nicaragua, has been living in Whitewater since 2022. He applied for asylum and is waiting to make his case to the government. 

He said he fled government oppression and human rights violations in Nicaragua. Since coming to Wisconsin, Chavez said he’s fallen in love with Whitewater and wants to make it his permanent home.

“The community is very friendly. … You got everything you need and everything is close,” he said. “The diversity you have here, it’s what makes Whitewater a really nice place.”

If he gets an asylum hearing after Trump takes office, Chavez says he’s hopeful the government will hear him out and grant him asylum. 

“I’m a little bit more concerned because I think the immigration law will be stricter,” he said. “But other than that, I like to go by the book. I’m doing things the way they should, and hopefully that talks about my desire of being here. I want to do things the right way.”

This story was originally published by WPR.

‘Our community is terrified’: Wisconsin immigrants brace for threat of mass deportations is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Wisconsin State Flag | Getty Images

Look on the bright side — all the talk about a stolen election, massive voter fraud, rigged voting machines and threats against local election workers disappeared overnight. Instead of planning an insurrection, MAGA Republicans have pivoted to picking out their outfits for president-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration parties. 

The minute it became clear that Trump won, Republican fulminating about “massive cheating” blew over. Wisconsin Elections Commission Administrator Meagan Wolfe declared the election in Wisconsin a “great success.” Bipartisan poll watchers agreed: the whole thing went off  practically without a hitch. Never mind the WisGOP warnings all day on social media about (nonexistent) illegal voting by noncitizens. Never mind the grandstanding at Central Count in Milwaukee by fake elector scheme co-conspirators Sen. Ron Johnson, elections commissioner Bob Spindell and WisGOP chair Brian Schimming. All is forgiven, because Trump won Wisconsin.

The mechanics of voting are not under attack. Instead, a majority of American voters, including a majority of Wisconsinites, chose to elect a right-wing authoritarian leader and to give his party control of the federal government, apparently because they believe Trump will repeal pandemic-fueled inflation (which is already way down in the U.S.).

As my friend Hugh Jackson, editor of our sister outlet the Nevada Current wrote on Wednesday morning:  “the U.S. Supreme Court, and the U.S. judiciary generally, is now even more on track to become nothing more than a functionary outlet for a right-wing extremist and authoritarian executive branch hell-bent on dismantling and superseding the rule of law. Also, poor Gaza. Poor Ukraine (poor Europe). And for all that, and so much more, a box of Honey Nut Cheerios still isn’t going to fall back to 2019 prices.”

Stress-eating leftover Halloween candy while watching the triumph of MAGA well into the wee hours, I remembered I’d agreed to speak to a group of retirees the morning after the election. What was there to say? The election results are a gut punch. Here in Wisconsin we are at the center of it. “You know Wisconsin put Trump over the top,” a journalist in Washington, D.C., texted me, helpfully. 

Since I had to pull myself together and try to make sense of the results, I headed downtown and found myself in a room full of friendly faces. There’s no sugar-coating things, I told them. The results are a shock. Especially for Wisconsin’s immigrant community, this is a frightening time and we need to do everything we can to support people and ease the fear and suffering of those who are the targets of terrifying threats.

There are a few bright spots in Wisconsin among Tuesday’s results. In addition to the hiatus on election denial, there are the results of state legislative races — the first to be run with Wisconsin’s new fair maps — which ended the gerrymandered GOP supermajority in the state Senate and yielded a more evenly divided state Assembly. 

The end of gerrymandering is the fruit of a long, difficult battle by citizens determined to get fair maps. It’s worth remembering that when all three branches of government in Wisconsin were controlled by a single party, that goal seemed far off. And a hard-fought win it was. We’ve come a long way. Don’t forget that progress is possible. It’s important to combat despair. 

There will be a lot of Monday-morning quarterbacking of this election. I’ve written about how I believe the Democrats lost touch with their working class base, and how Trump took the opportunity to move into that space with his right-wing populist message.

But the fact is Harris was a powerful candidate who picked up the torch from Biden when he fell apart, painfully, publicly and irretrievably. 

There are those who say our country is too sexist or too racist for a woman of color to be elected president. Another white guy would have been better, they suggest. Without a doubt, misogyny and racism were big features of the 2024 campaign. But you don’t beat that backlash by surrendering to it. And we must beat it back. That takes a lot of resilience. Harris took us another step forward in making Americans believe they could elect a female president. It will take more than one or two tries to bring that about.

For now, perhaps the most important thing for all of us who are hurting after this election is to prioritize real, human contact. Remember that you are still surrounded by friends, neighbors and loved ones. We need to connect with each other and stay in touch. As simple and maybe even simplistic as it sounds, we need each other’s company to help get us through this difficult time. We need to see other people in person and we need to take a break from scrolling online.

Being with other people, strengthening our bonds of affection and solidarity, is the foundation of democracy. That’s where we need to start. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A scene from the nine-day march to the Wisconsin State Capitol in 2022. Marchers, organized by Voces de la Frontera, demanded immigration reform from the federal government. (Photo | Joe Brusky)

As an undocumented American I have been holding my breath throughout this campaign season. I am fortunate to have Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) status, but like millions of other immigrants, I’m not just worrying about health care reforms or economic policies. We are fighting for our lives, our loved ones, and the dream of one day belonging to the only place millions of us call home. This election feels like a perilous moment in time where everything is hanging in the balance. 

Each campaign rally, debate, and potential policy change announcement feels personal. Each candidate’s words either threaten or bring solace. 

There is a blend of excitement and fear but overall dread. The deep lingering fear of deportation on the horizon and the impact of living in constant uncertainty, but on the other hand there’s a spark of possibility that finally one of these candidates will do right by us. That maybe, just maybe a pathway to citizenship is within reach. Every time that hope grows, it is shadowed by the possibility that things might never change or worse, regress.

We can’t take a day off from  the dreadful reality of living day-to-day as an undocumented person in a country that has increasingly polarized views on immigration regardless of who’s in office. Many of us have been here for years, working hard, contributing to Medicaid and Social Security funding with no security for ourselves. Yet in some corners of this nation we are still viewed as outsiders. We live in constant fear of our families being separated, and the grumbling feeling that we are somehow “illegal” and as if our existence is a crime.  We hope to finally be seen  as human.

The heaviest burden is waiting for the next administration to change everything for us, not knowing if whoever is in office  will truly follow through for better or worse. There’s a part of us that wonders if we’ll ever be able to celebrate a concrete win. And so we wait, quietly and carefully, trying to believe that hope will be justified. 

Watching from the sidelines, we know that a path to citizenship would not only change our lives but would be an affirmation that we are finally a part of American history. And so we wait, with a knot in our throats, our future hanging on the outcome. Knowing that no matter what happens, we will keep fighting to belong in a place where we call home.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Morning commuter traffic waits to cross into the United States from Tijuana, Mexico, in March 2024. South of San Diego, the San Ysidro Port of Entry is the largest land crossing between the two countries and the most transited in the Western Hemisphere. Some 70,000 vehicles and 20,000 pedestrians pass through there daily. Border and immigration issues have become dominant themes in the 2024 presidential election. (John Moore | Getty Images)

MYTH: Immigrants increase crime rates 

Among the most persistent political talking points raised by opponents of immigration is that migrants bring crime with them into the U.S.

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” former President Donald Trump famously said on the campaign trail in 2016.

“Has anybody ever seen the movie ‘Gangs of New York’?” Republican vice presidential nominee J.D. Vance asked during a meeting with the Milwaukee Police Association in August. “We know that when you have these massive ethnic enclaves forming in our country, it can sometimes lead to higher crime rates.”

In reality, the opposite is true. Immigrants are far less likely than U.S.-born citizens to commit crimes, numerous studies show. One study of incarceration rates going back over 150 years — between 1870 and 2020 — found that U.S.-born citizens were consistently more likely to end up in prison than immigrants. And the gap between the two groups has only increased in recent years, with immigrants 60% less likely to be incarcerated than U.S.-born citizens today, according to the nonpartisan National Bureau of Economic Research.

Assertions that immigrants have caused spikes in crime in the areas where they settle have also been proven false. Overall, incidents of crime, including violent crime, have fallen in cities across the country since peaking during the pandemic, FBI data shows. And while politicians have claimed that border cities have been overwhelmed by lawlessness and chaos, the data shows that crime rates, including for homicide, are far lower than the national average.

The equation of immigrants with criminals is exhausting to hear for Irayda Flores, a businesswoman in Phoenix, Arizona. Flores moved to the Grand Canyon State from Sonora, Mexico, in 2004, hoping to make her entrepreneurial dreams a reality. Since then, her seafood wholesale business, El Mar de Cortez Corp, has thrived, serving restaurants across the city and employing more than a dozen people. But despite the example she and other immigrants provide, politicians continue to frame them as villains.

The rhetoric is the same every election year, she said, and it ignores the positive contributions of many of the immigrants who left their home countries to seek a better future.

“Politicians talk about the migrant community like they’re criminals, like they are really awful people,” Flores said. “But when migrants leave their country — their culture and the land that they were born and grew up in — they do it because they’re searching for opportunity. And searching for a new opportunity means they come here with the intention to work and get ahead.”

Dismissing all immigrants as criminals is harmful, she added, and unfair to the work many immigrants have put in to make a difference in their host communities.

“You can’t generalize or treat an entire immigrant group as criminals because there are people who’ve lived in the country for decades, and they bring benefits to the table,” Flores said. “They benefit the economy, they benefit their communities, and they deserve to be treated with respect.”

MYTH: There’s an invasion at the U.S.-Mexico border

While the campaign season has prompted politicians to stir up voters about an “invasion” at the country’s southern border, the situation is more complex. In late 2023, the number of migrant encounters at the U.S.-Mexico border hit record highs. In December 2023, more than 300,000 encounters between border officials and migrants occurred at the country’s southern border — an all-time high. Experts believe the surge was, in part, the result of a global spike in migration patterns caused by economic strains during the pandemic.

In January 2024 the record high set in December plummeted to about 176,000 encounters. The number eventually fell to a three-year low not seen since before the pandemic. In August, the month for which the most recent data is available, encounters increased slightly from to 107,503 from 104,101 in July.

MYTH: Fentanyl is smuggled into the country by migrants

The U.S.-Mexico border stretches across nearly 2,000 miles and includes 26 land ports of entry. U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents monitor both ports and the spaces in between. The vast majority of fentanyl is smuggled into the U.S. via legal routes by citizens, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security reports. More than 90% of interdicted fentanyl is confiscated by border officials at land ports of entry, according to DHS, and cartels mainly seek to move the drug across the border with the help of U.S. citizens. In fiscal year 2023, the latest year for which there is data, 86.4% of fentanyl trafficking convictions were citizens.

MYTH: Immigrants take advantage of public benefits 

In most cases, immigrants who aren’t citizens of the United States are ineligible for public benefits. Federal programs like Section 8 housing aid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)  are all strictly reserved for U.S. citizens.

Immigrants who aren’t citizens also can’t receive subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, and they can’t apply for federal health insurance coverage through the marketplace.

People with legal permanent residency status, however, may be able to access some public benefits after reaching the five-year residency mark.

Some federal protections are in place to ensure that migrants have access to care if they are facing life-threatening circumstances. Emergency Medicaid helps migrants without legal status receive urgent medical treatment, and some benefits are available to migrant women under the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program.

Eligibility for state public benefit programs varies across the country and can range from access to driver’s licenses to in-state tuition rates and scholarships.

MYTH: It’s easy to gain U.S. citizenship 

Gaining citizenship is a costly, multistep and complicated process. And backlogged naturalization and asylum systems mean long wait times for hopeful migrants.

Those seeking to achieve legal status through marriage must pass a number of hurdles meant to verify that the marriage is genuine, including periodic interviews with immigration officials. Couples often spend hundreds or thousands of dollars and years in the application process.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals grants people without legal status who were brought to the country as minors protection from deportation and a temporary work permit, but recipients must meet strict criteria to qualify. That includes living in the U.S. since 2007, having arrived in the country before turning 16, no significant criminal convictions and either current enrollment in a high school, a diploma or a GED.

DACA recipients who were accepted into the program must reapply for a renewal every two years. And while recipients can apply for legal residency status if they are eligible through their family or via employment-based immigration, the DACA program is currently frozen. Though applications are still being accepted, they aren’t being processed while the program is under ongoing litigation that threatens to end it altogether.

Asylum seekers must undergo fear screenings with immigration officials to determine if their concerns about persecution or threats to their lives warrant being granted protection in the U.S. New guidance issued by the Biden administration barring the consideration of asylum claims when high numbers of migrant encounters occur has made it more difficult for people to request asylum.

Those hoping for a resolution in their asylum or refugee cases might wait years. In 2019, the immigration backlog ballooned to more than 1 million cases, a number that only doubled in the following years. As of September, the number of pending immigration cases exceeded 3 million. The average time it takes to close a case is four years, according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, an organization that compiles and analyzes federal immigration data.

MYTH: Immigrants don’t pay taxes

Roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants live in the United States, and all of them pay some form of taxes. An analysis of the 2022 American Community Survey, an annual demographics survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau, estimated that immigrants contributed $383 billion in federal taxes, and $196 billion in state and local taxes. And while people without legal status can’t benefit from Social Security, the administration receives about $13 billion from the paychecks of workers without citizenship status every year.

Saúl Rascón moved to the U.S. with his family when he was 5-years-old. He became a DACA recipient in high school and has been employed ever since. Today, he works with Aliento Votes, a pro-immigrant voter outreach campaign. Accusations that immigrants don’t pay their taxes irritate Rascón, who views it as a way to diminish the demographic group’s contributions.

“It’s particularly frustrating when immigrants are pinned as this economic deficit and harm when it’s been proven time and time again that they’re not,” he said.

The problem, Rascón said, is that the claim is believable to the average voter who doesn’t do additional research. And that claim is dangerous for all immigrants, including himself, because it could engender hostility towards the community as a whole.

The spread of disinformation about immigrants is harmful, he added, not just because it fosters anti-immigrant sentiment, but also because it makes it more difficult to find common ground when it comes to changing the country’s immigration system. While Republican politicians have focused on riling up their base against immigrants, Democrats have shifted to the right on the issue, increasingly spotlighting enforcement policy to capture as many votes as possible.

“We’re no longer focusing our energy on our Dreamers and DACA, on undocumented people who’ve been here, and contributing taxes,” Rascón said. “We’ve seen a shift towards border security, which isn’t unproductive but it’s not the best use of our time and resources.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

In this photo from July 2021, a person stands next to the U.S.-Mexico border barrier in Tijuana, Mexico, painted with a mural depicting people who arrived in the U.S. illegally as children and were deported as adults. (Mario Tama | Getty Images)

Swing state voters, including in Wisconsin, favor a number of immigration policy changes, according to a new survey. “Mass deportation” — promised by the Republican candidate for president, former President Donald Trump — isn’t one of them.

The survey isn’t aimed at simply taking the public’s immediate temperature on issues at the top of the political agenda, however.

Produced by  the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland, it’s part of a project that asks people how they want to see various social and civic problems solved after they are informed about the details and pros and cons of various options.

The goal “is to give the public a greater voice, bring the public to the table, give them a meaningful understanding of the issues [and] widen the range of issues that they can engage with and articulate their views on,” program director Steven Kull said in an interview.

The process helps counteract public misinformation about subjects, at least among poll participants, Kull said. It also aims to open people’s minds to opposing arguments for policies. “People often can go inside silos and not hear arguments on both sides,” he  said.

Kull believes surveys that simply ask a person’s opinion on a policy proposal fall short unless they make room for people to fully consider context: the nature of the problem itself and the potential consequences of various options. Those surveys also don’t adequately engage the public in thinking about and helping to shape effective policy, he contends.

Simply asking the public’s opinion of “mass deportation” of immigrants who are in the U.S. without legal status is an example.

“What it exactly means is not very clear,” Kull said. “It’s just kind of a feeling statement.”

Letting the public assess options

Addressing the impending shortfall in the Social Security system offers another illustration.

Asked about raising the retirement age or raising the payroll tax that funds the program, most people are likely to give a thumbs-down to both options, Kull said — while at the same time affirming that they want Social Security to remain viable.

“And you put those together and you go, ‘Oh, the public’s a big baby. They don’t really understand these things. And it’s third rail, better stay away from it,’” Kull said.

By contrast, the Program for Public Consultation’s survey began with a presentation of alternatives for dealing with Social Security’s threatened insolvency. Survey participants were then asked about those alternatives — including combining several as part of an overall solution.

“We presented all the options and told them what the effects would be of each one, and evaluated arguments pro and con,” Kull said. “There were majorities that did address the Social Security shortfall effectively and made hard decisions.”

Going against stereotype, “Democrats cut benefits, Republicans raised taxes,” he added. “And there was actually a remarkable amount of convergence.”

The proposed benefit cuts in the survey were for the highest 20% of earners, and the tax increase consisted of gradually raising the payroll tax from 6.2% to 6.5% of income, as well as subjecting income over $400,000 to the payroll tax, currently capped at $169,000.

The Program for Public Consultation has been conducting surveys over the last several months on subjects that have been at the forefront of the 2024 election campaigns. The surveys have included national samples as well as samples from six battleground states in the presidential race.

Kull said the policy simulations at the heart of the program present issues in language comprehensible to someone with a high school education. Alternatives are also reviewed by proponents and opponents of each proposal.

A survey reported in early September examined public response on abortion rights. It showed majorities opposed criminalizing abortion, although Democrats and Republicans differed in the percentage taking that position.

Focusing on immigration

The immigration survey released Thursday asks participants to consider how to address the presence of 11 million immigrants in the U.S. without any legal status. Trump and other Republican candidates have sought to center undocumented immigrants, often with misleading or false claims about crime, and Trump has emphasized his intention to conduct a mass deportation of immigrants if he’s elected.

The survey reviewed various policy alternatives. Among them were provisions from the 2013 immigration reform legislation that passed the U.S. Senate on a bipartisan 68-32 vote but died in the House of Representatives.

“All the main elements are here, and they all get pretty robust majority support, and most of it bipartisan,” Kull said.

The survey’s proposed “path to legal citizenship” describes the creation of a new visa for undocumented immigrants already in the U.S. who meet certain conditions. The visa would allow them to apply for citizenship after several years.

The survey projects that removing 11 million immigrants without legal status from the U.S. would cost $100 billion or more.

Given those descriptions, 63% of Wisconsinites in the survey preferred the path to citizenship over deportation. That included 77% of Democrats and 41% of Republicans.

Overall 25% of Wisconsinites in the survey favored mass deportation, including 14% of Democrats and 36% of Republicans. The remaining 11% of Wisconsin participants (12% of Republicans and 9% of Democrats) favored neither alternative.

The survey’s Wisconsin sample consisted of 605 people.

Bipartisan agreement — sometimes

While the strength of support or opposition to those and other policy options varied from state to state, survey participants in five other swing states and the national survey sample all favored the path to citizenship over mass deportation, although support from Democrats was higher.

Similar bipartisan majorities favor hiring more Border Patrol agents, requiring employers to use E-Verify to confirm all hires are legally allowed to work in the U.S. and increasing the number of work visas that would allow migrant workers to enter the U.S. legally.

Some policies show a partisan division, at least in some states. A majority of Wisconsin Republicans — 54% — oppose hiring more immigration judges to reduce the backlog of applicants seeking asylum, while 76% of Democrats support that option. Overall, 61% of Wisconsinites in the survey were in favor. 

Building more walls on the border — which survey participants are told would cost about $25 billion — was favored by 55% of Wisconsinites overall, and by 76% of Wisconsin Republicans. It was opposed by 54% of Democrats

Members of the public can visit the program website and go through the policymaking simulation themselves. It is available in English and Spanish.

The program’s swing state survey findings might not be able to predict how people will vote on the issues in the coming election, but Kull said he doesn’t believe simpler surveys are able to do that reliably, either.

“The response to the question, ‘Do you favor or oppose mass deportation?’ doesn’t really give us anything,” he said. “It can just be people kind of reacting randomly.”

For Kull, the survey findings suggest a common theme in the concerns that participants have about immigration.

“The public is frustrated that the process is in this kind of chaos,” he said. In the survey, “there’s basically support for every step that assimilates the process into a legal framework.”

Claudia Kline, an organizer for Our Voice, Our Vote Arizona, speaks to a group of canvassers before they set out to knock on doors in 106-degree weather in Phoenix on Thursday, Sept. 26. The organization is part of a coalition that vowed to knock on 3 million doors by November. (Gloria Rebecca Gomez | Arizona Mirror)

Editor’s note: This five-day series explores the priorities of voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin as they consider the upcoming presidential election. With the outcome expected to be close, these “swing states” may decide the future of the country.

As former President Donald Trump worked to scuttle a bipartisan border deal in Congress because it threatened to derail his campaign’s focus on immigration, Republicans in Arizona unveiled a plan to empower local officials to jail and deport migrants, decrying the federal government’s lack of solutions.

“Arizona is in a crisis,” state Senate President Warren Petersen said in late January. “This is directly due to the negligent inaction of the Biden administration.”

What followed were months of GOP lawmakers in Arizona making use of Trump’s border security rhetoric, employing xenophobic language to cast immigrants and asylum-seekers as criminals. But there was strident opposition to the plan, too, from many Latino and immigrant Arizonans who traveled to the state Capitol to protest the legislation.

Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris offer starkly different plans for the future of the 11 million people who live in the United States without legal status. Harris, in a bid to stave off accusations that she’s soft on the border, has sought to establish a firm security stance. To that end, she has vowed to bring back and sign the torpedoed bipartisan border deal.

On the campaign trail, Trump has taken a far more hawkish approach, promising mass deportations. He has offered few details, other than that he would be willing to involve the U.S. National Guard. President Joe Biden, Trump and other recent presidents have deployed the National Guard or military troops to support Border Patrol actions, but not in direct law enforcement roles.

Immigration has consistently ranked high among voter concerns nationwide, following heightened political rhetoric and a record-breaking number of unlawful border crossings in late 2023. Those numbers have since plummeted to a three-year low, but the U.S. border with Mexico remains a key talking point for Republican politicians.

But immigration is a far more complex topic than border security alone, and strategists may be miscalculating by failing to consider some key voters and their nuanced perspectives, recent polling shows.

Growing populations of new and first-generation citizens in the swing states — with the power to sway elections — are transforming demographics and voter concerns.

In Arizona, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed the legislation that would have allowed local law enforcement to usurp federal authority on immigration, but Republicans repackaged it as a ballot initiative called the “Secure the Border Act.” In a state that Biden won by fewer than 11,000 votes four years ago, and where political strategists anticipate high voter turnout, the ballot measure serves as a test of whether the GOP’s immigration position will drive people to the polls in a swing state.

While many Republicans hope the immigration issue boosts their chances in down-ballot races, progressive organizations are working to mobilize voters in opposition through canvassing and voter registration drives.

Living United for Change in Arizona was established in the aftermath of the state’s controversial “show me your papers” law — SB 1070 — passed 14 years ago by Republican lawmakers. LUCHA Chief of Staff Abril Gallardo derided this year’s Secure the Border Act as the latest iteration of that law.

“Arizonans are sick of Republicans trying to bring back the SB 1070 era of separating families, mass deportations and children in detention centers,” she said. “We’re here to say, ‘Not on our watch.’”

The ballot measure has been widely criticized as greenlighting discrimination. Among other provisions, it would make it a state crime for migrants to cross the southern border anywhere except a legal port of entry and punish first-time offenders with six months in jail. Local police officers would be authorized to carry out arrests based on suspicion of illegal entry, and Arizona judges would be empowered to issue orders of deportation, undermining court rulings that have concluded that enforcing immigration law is the sole purview of the federal government.

Gallardo said that LUCHA is focused on engaging with voters to ensure the proposal fails. The organization is part of a coalition of advocacy groups committed to knocking on more than 3 million doors before November.

“They can try to ignore us, but come Election Day and beyond, they will hear us, they will see us, and they will feel the strength of our movement,” she said.

An August UnidosUS and BSP Research survey asked Latino voters in Arizona about their top priorities on several issues related to immigration policy. The results show strong support for protecting longtime residents from deportation and offering them a path to citizenship — along with cracking down on human smugglers and drug traffickers. Policies centered on building a wall or mass deportation ranked near the bottom. In recent years, Latino voters in the state have helped reject virulently anti-immigrant candidates.

Latino voting strength

In 2020, Latinos made up about 20% of the state’s electorate, and they largely favored Biden over Trump. Then, two years later, a record-breaking number of Latinos voted in an election that saw Democrats win statewide offices. Today, 1 in 4 Arizona voters is Latino, and a new poll from Univision estimates that more than 600,000 will cast their ballots in the state’s November election.

The Grand Canyon State is far from the only swing state with both impactful Latino and new-citizen voting blocs.

Still, campaigns might be ignoring these voters. The UnidosUS poll showed 51% of Latino voters in Georgia hadn’t been contacted by either party or any campaign, even though 56% say they’re sure they’ll vote.

“This is, I think, a wake-up call for both parties to reach out into the Latino community,” said BSP senior analyst Stephen Nuño-Perez in a Georgia Recorder story. “There’s still not a lot of education out there on why Latinos should be voting for one party or the other.”

The numbers hovered right around there in other swing states. In Pennsylvania, that was true for 50% of the people polled. In North Carolina, it was 49%. In Nevada, 53%. In each case, a higher percentage said they plan to vote.

Influence grows in dairy country

The number of Latino voters in Wisconsin is a fraction of the electorate that lives in states closer to the U.S.-Mexico border but no less impactful. There are roughly 180,000 eligible Latino voters who call the Badger State home. Biden carried Wisconsin in 2020 by a margin of about 21,000 votes, less than 1 percentage point.

Christine Neumann-Ortiz is the executive director of Voces de la Frontera, a civil and workers rights organization that advocates on behalf of immigrants. She said that over time, the Latino vote has become increasingly sought after by politicians looking to gain office.

“If you don’t get it, you don’t win it,” she said.

Neumann-Ortiz said that the rise of the Latino electorate has translated into political power. The group has been a longtime backer of driver’s licenses for Wisconsinites without full citizenship status, and occupational licenses for recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, a federal policy that grants temporary work permits and protection from deportation to people who arrived in the country as minors.

Nineteen states and the District of Columbia allow people without citizenship status to obtain driver’s licenses. And just 12 give DACA recipients the opportunity to obtain medical or legal licenses.

Legislation in Wisconsin to open up access to either license was blocked by the GOP legislative majority, though the movement behind the proposals drew support from top officials, including Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, who backed driver’s licenses for all as a policy priority last year. Influential lobbying organizations, such as the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation and the Dairy Business Association, both of which lean conservative, also threw their weight behind the push for universal driver’s licenses.

Neumann-Ortiz attributes that support to the fact that immigrants make up a large part of the state’s dairy and agricultural industries. And in rural areas where dairy operations and farms are located, public transportation is sparse. United Migrant Opportunity Services, a Milwaukee-based farmworker advocacy organization, estimates that as much as 40% of the state’s dairy workers are immigrants. Other estimates indicate they contribute 80% of the labor on dairy farms.

Despite being over 1,000 miles away from the U.S.-Mexico border, immigration and border security are key issues for Wisconsinites, and their positions appear mixed. In a September survey from Marquette University’s Law School, 49% said they agreed with deporting all immigrants who have lived in the country for years, have jobs and no criminal record, while 51% opposed it.

Newly minted citizens stand to break new electoral ground

Laila Martin Garcia moved to the United States with her husband and infant son eight years ago. November will be the first time she casts her ballot for a U.S. presidential candidate since she became a naturalized citizen two years ago in Pennsylvania, and she’s elated.

“The main reason for me to become a citizen was to vote,” she said. “You know, this is home. This is where my husband is, where my son is being raised, and I wanted to make sure that I was using my voice in any way possible.”

She’s part of another segment of the electorate that will have a chance to respond in the voting booth to the election-year emphasis on immigration: newly naturalized voters. In fiscal year 2023, just over 878,000 immigrants became naturalized U.S. citizens, according to the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank. That number represents a slight decline from the previous fiscal year, when a little more than 969,000 people achieved naturalization –— the highest number of new citizens in a decade.

Newly naturalized voters can close the gaps in swing state races, according to Nancy Flores, who serves as the deputy director of the National Partnership for New Americans, a coalition of immigrant and refugee rights organizations.

Every presidential election year, the coalition partners with local organizations to assist eligible immigrants as they embark on the naturalization process and help newly naturalized citizens register to vote. New citizens, Flores said, are a great investment, because once they’ve made a commitment to vote, they will likely continue to do so. And naturalized voters appear to cast their ballots at higher rates than U.S.-born citizens. In the 2020 election, about 66% of the general electorate turned out to vote, compared with nearly 87% of naturalized voters surveyed by the organization.

This year appears on track to repeat that trend: As many as 97.3% of naturalized voters residing in states polled by the National Partnership for New Americans — including in the swing states of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania — reported that they plan to vote this fall.

“For a lot of folks, reaching the point of citizenship is really a lifetime achievement,” Flores said. “And we see that folks really don’t take that lightly.”

And while Flores noted that naturalized citizens don’t fit one single voter profile, most of them do share an immigrant background and so are sympathetic on the issue.

“New American voters are not a monolith,” she said. “Folks that are naturalized are doctors, professors. We have folks that are naturalized that are picking the fruit that we eat. It really runs the gamut, but the common thread is the immigrant experience.”

A poll conducted by the organization found that naturalized voters share many of the same concerns as other U.S. voters, including worries about inflation and the economy. But, Flores added, candidates who are looking to attract naturalized voters are likely to be most successful with the demographic group when they present a positive view of immigration.

“Looking at immigration as an asset to our country, looking at how it can benefit the economy, looking at how we can provide pathways [to citizenship] that are humane — those things resonated with voters,” she said.

Similarly, Martin Garcia’s experiences as an immigrant have colored her views as a voter. Immigration reform, she said, is at the top of her priorities. Originally from Barcelona, Spain, Martin Garcia arrived in the U.S. in the middle of Trump’s first campaign, and she said she saw firsthand what his anti-immigrant rhetoric and policies wrought.

In her work as an advocate, she frequently helped families torn apart by deportations, and in her personal life, while trying to share her language and culture with her son, she dealt with nativist hostility. During one incident at the grocery store, while she was helping her toddler identify items in Spanish, a stranger accosted her.

“I remember he came up to me and said, ‘We’re in America, speak American,’” she recalled. “Now that I think of that moment, I have so many things to say to that person. But at that moment, I was so scared. I just took my child, left my cart there with half of my groceries, and left the shop.”

Today, she recalls that incident, and the rallies and protests during Trump’s presidency, as catalysts for her civic engagement. Martin Garcia said she views the 2024 election as an opportunity to look out for the immigrant community’s needs.

“We deserve to thrive, and we will be thinking about that,” she said. “We have to make sure that our communities have the right to thrive in this election.”

This story has been updated with additional photographs and data visualization graphics.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Absentee ballots are prepared to be mailed at the Wake County Board of Elections on Sept. 17, 2024 in Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina will send out absentee ballots to military and overseas citizens by Sept. 20. Other absentee ballots will be sent by Sept. 24 to voters who requested ballots by mail. Early voting begins Oct. 17. (Photo by Allison Joyce/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — With seven weeks until Election Day, the campaign machines for Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump appealed to coveted voters in the battleground states with events and rallies targeting the Black and Gen Z populations, rural voters and conservative Christians.

The Trump campaign set its eyes on Michigan Tuesday, as the former president geared up for an evening town hall in Flint — his first event since a second apparent assassination attempt on his life Sunday, this time at his Florida golf course.

Trump’s running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance, spoke Tuesday afternoon at a rally in a barn in Sparta, just north of Grand Rapids, where he once again talked about a population of migrants from Haiti who live in Springfield, Ohio. Hundreds of thousands of Haitians are living legally in the U.S. under temporary protected status.

The migrants “primarily from Hatia have been dropped into Springfield,” Vance said, mispronouncing the name of the Caribbean nation.

Trump and Vance continue to face severe scrutiny for peddling lies that Haitian migrants in the town had been eating pet cats and dogs. Trump hurled the accusation during last Tuesday’s ABC News debate hosted that drew 67 million viewers.

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine on Monday ordered state police to sweep Springfield schools that have been repeated targets of bomb threats since the town was thrust into the national spotlight.

Campaigns seek media attention

Vance took several questions from local Michigan reporters Tuesday and said he did so to distinguish himself from Harris, whom he accused of fearing the “friendly American press corps.”

Vance made the comment less than an hour before Harris sat down for a public discussion with a three-member panel from the National Association of Black Journalists in Philadelphia. Trump’s interview with the association in July became notorious after he said Harris “happened to turn Black” during her political career.

Both campaigns have been seeking news media exposure.

Harris sat for a one-on-one with Philadelphia’s ABC affiliate Friday. That same day, Trump hosted a press conference at his Trump National Golf Course in Los Angeles.

Harris’ running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, hit central Georgia Tuesday, where he recorded an interview with a local news anchor in Macon for WMAZ-TV and spoke to staff at one of the campaign’s field offices.

The Harris-Walz operation in Georgia includes 28 offices and over 200 staff, according to the campaign.

Fried chicken biscuit and tax breaks

Walz stopped at the long-established H&H Soul Food Restaurant in Macon, where he ordered a biscuit with fried chicken, bacon jam and pimento cheese, according to reporters traveling with him.

Walz took the opportunity at the eatery to plug Harris’ platform to simplify taxes for small businesses and give a $50,000 tax deduction for start-up costs.

He also attended campaign events in Atlanta before traveling to a rally Tuesday night in Asheville, North Carolina.

Earlier Tuesday, the Harris campaign released a statement in reaction to a ProPublica report about 28-year-old Amber Nicole Thurman, who died in Georgia because she was denied urgent care under the state’s strict abortion ban.

“This young mother should be alive, raising her son, and pursuing her dream of attending nursing school,” Harris said in the statement. “This is exactly what we feared when Roe was struck down.”

When asked earlier Tuesday about the ProPublica report, Vance said he’d “like to learn a little bit more” about Thurman’s death.

“I’ve never spoken to a single pro-life person who doesn’t believe in exceptions to cover this exact scenario,” Vance told a local Michigan reporter.

Six states have abortion bans in effect that have no health exceptions, according to KFF Health News’ abortion law tracker.

On Monday evening, Vance told an audience at the Georgia Faith and Freedom Victory Dinner in Atlanta that the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2021 decision to overturn Roe, which established federal abortion rights, was a “victory.”

“I stand here as the vice presidential nominee saying the Republican Party is proud to be the pro-life and the pro-family party,” Vance said before promising that a second Trump presidency would usher in investments in fertility treatments, prenatal care, maternal health and newborn expenses.

Trump spent Monday night plugging his new cryptocurrency venture alongside his sons in an interview on the social media platform X. The Trump family unveiled a crypto business Monday under the name World Liberty Financial.

Youth voters

The Harris campaign marked National Voter Registration Day Tuesday with what it’s calling an “all-hands-on-deck mobilization” to reach young voters.

The campaign plans to deputize celebrities, influencers and organizers to college campuses, basketball tournaments and “bracelet-making events” — in an apparent nod to Swiftie friendship bracelets following the pop star’s Harris endorsement last week.

Organizers anticipate a “targeted presence” at Historically Black Colleges and Universities as well as Hispanic-Serving Institutions.

Pop star Billie Eilish and her songwriter brother Fineas O’Connell endorsed the vice president Tuesday on social media and urged their followers to visit the Democratic Party’s IWillVote.com platform.

Among the other celebrities being deployed by the campaign to reach university students: actress Jane Fonda and celebrity scientist Bill Nye.

East Coast stops

The campaigns continue at full speed Wednesday, and the candidates and their surrogates will make stops up and down the eastern U.S.

• Harris will deliver remarks at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Leadership conference in Washington, D.C.
• Trump will host an evening rally in Uniondale, New York
• Vance will deliver remarks during the afternoon in Raleigh, North Carolina
• Second gentleman Doug Emhoff will deliver remarks at campaign events in New York City

Actress and film producer Marsai Martin delivers remarks during a brunch held to celebrate Black Excellence on the South Lawn of the White House on Sept. 13, 2024 in Washington, D.C. President Biden hosted the brunch during the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s annual Legislative Conference this week to recognize achievements in the Black community. At right is Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young. (Photo by Anna Rose Layden/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden, in the last months of his four-year term, detailed his administration’s efforts in seeking to advance opportunities and equity for Black communities on Friday during the White House’s first-ever brunch in celebration of Black Excellence.

The event came as the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation hosted its annual legislative conference this week in Washington, D.C.

“Today, we honor this simple truth: Black history is American history, Black excellence is American excellence, and folks, we don’t erase history like others are trying to — we make history,” Biden said to a crowd on the South Lawn that included members of the Congressional Black Caucus and other Black leaders.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre; Trell Thomas, founder of Black Excellence Brunch; Marsai Martin, an actress and producer; and Shalanda Young, director of the Office of Management and Budget, gave brief remarks ahead of Biden.

“I know it because I’ve seen it. I’ve been vice president to the first Black president in American history, a president to the first Black vice president — and God willing, to the first female Black president in American history,” Biden added.

Biden — who originally sought a second term — passed the torch to Vice President Kamala Harris in mid-July following his disastrous debate performance in June against the Republican presidential nominee, former President Donald Trump.

Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, now has the chance to become the first woman to serve as president, the first Black woman president, and the first president of South Asian descent.

Biden also underscored some of the administration’s key efforts in regard to Black communities, such as achieving the lowest Black unemployment rate on record. As of August, the administration has created 2.4 million jobs for Black workers, according to a White House fact sheet.

He also emphasized the administration’s efforts to ensure that more Black Americans have health care than ever before. The White House says it’s done so by “lowering premium costs by an average of $800 for millions of Americans, increasing Black enrollment in Affordable Care Act coverage by 95%, or over 1.7 million people since 2020,” per the fact sheet.

Biden added that “on this very lawn, in front of the White House built by enslaved people, we hosted the first-ever Juneteenth concert after I made Juneteenth a federal holiday, and on this lawn, we celebrated the first Black woman appointed to the United States Supreme Court, the best decision I made: Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.”

He also condemned racism toward Haitian migrants to the U.S., saying the community is “under attack in our country right now” and calling it “simply wrong.” Conspiracy theories about migrants and bomb threats continue to rock Springfield, Ohio.

Trump at Tuesday’s presidential debate hosted by ABC News amplified false claims about Haitian migrants there, saying: “In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs, the people that came in, they’re eating the cats,” adding that “they’re eating the pets of the people that live there.”

Appearing to allude to Trump, Biden added that “there’s no place in America. This has to stop, what he’s doing. It has to stop.”

Meanwhile, Biden and Harris are both slated to speak at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s Phoenix Awards Dinner Saturday in Washington, D.C.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Democratic presidential nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris, greets the Republican presidential nominee, former President Donald Trump, as they joined other officials at Ground Zero on Sept. 11, 2024, honoring the lives of those lost in the terror attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City. The handshake came the day after a fiery debate between the candidates. (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The presidential race between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump intensified in the days following their first, and likely only, debate, as both hit swing states with just over 50 days until the election.

The Harris campaign rode a wave of momentum to the week’s end, cutting ads featuring debate clips and kicking off an “aggressive” blitz of battleground states that it dubbed the “New Way Forward” tour.

Trump and Republican Party officials meanwhile filed what they described as “election integrity” lawsuits this week targeting voter registration and absentee ballots in Nevada and Michigan.

While numerous polls showed Harris outperformed the former president at Tuesday’s debate, Trump continued to tout his performance at a press conference Friday and chastised a reporter for suggesting some Republicans thought he gave a poor showing.

“We’ve gotten great praise for the debate,” he said, adding “You know, look, you come from Fox (News), you shouldn’t play the same game as everybody else.”

He has refused to debate Harris again.

Trump repeats lies about migrants

Trump spoke for roughly an hour and took a dozen questions at the Trump National Golf Course in Los Angeles where he promised, if elected, “to start with Springfield and Aurora” when he carries out the “largest deportation in the history of our country.”

Trump has repeated baseless rumors that Venezuelan gangs overtook an apartment building in Aurora, Colorado. In an unforgettable moment during Tuesday’s debate he claimed Haitian migrants are eating domesticated pets in Springfield, Ohio — a lie that circulated among the right on social media, including from his running mate, Ohio’s junior U.S. Sen. J.D. Vance.

Hundreds of thousands of Haitians live in the U.S. legally under temporary protected status after the nearby Caribbean nation was rocked by a violent government collapse this spring.

When asked by a reporter Friday if he felt any concern for the Ohio community that has been thrust into the national spotlight and is now the target of bomb threats, Trump said no.

“The real threat is what’s happening at our borders,” he snapped back.

Trump also lobbed similar attacks at a Thursday night rally in Tucson, Arizona, describing a small western Pennsylvania town of Charleroi as “not so beautiful now” because Haitian migrants moved in.

In reality, Charleroi has suffered population loss and blight for decades following the collapse of the steel industry in the 1980s.

Harris campaigns in North Carolina, Pennsylvania

Prior to the debate, a national New York Times/Siena poll showed Trump with a slight edge over Harris.

“We are the underdog, let’s be clear about that,” Harris told a roaring crowd in Greensboro, North Carolina Thursday night. “And so we have hard work ahead of us, but we like hard work.”

Harris held back-to-back campaign rallies Thursday night in North Carolina’s Raleigh and Greensboro that together drew 25,000, according to campaign figures.

The vice president headed to the battleground state of Pennsylvania Friday, where she first visited Classic Elements, a bookshop and cafe in the ruby-red Johnstown area before a nighttime rally in Wilkes-Barre.

The commonwealth’s junior U.S. Sen. John Fetterman and wife Gisele accompanied Harris to the small business, where she told about a dozen patrons, “You’ve created a space that is a safe space, where people are welcome and know that they’re encouraged to be with each other and feel a sense of belonging,” according to reporters traveling with her.

“I will be continuing to travel around the state to make sure that I’m listening as much as we are talking,” Harris said. “And ultimately I feel very strongly that you’ve got to earn every vote and that means spending time with folks in the communities where they live. And so that’s why I’m here and we’re going to be spending a lot more time in Pennsylvania.”

Harris garnered the coveted endorsement from mega pop star and Pennsylvania native Taylor Swift immediately after the debate.

Both Trump and Harris at 9/11 ceremony

By week’s end the vice president added to her list of Republican endorsements, when the Bush-era Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez announced his support. Gonzalez, who served under former president George W. Bush, wrote Thursday in Politico that Trump poses “perhaps the most serious threat to the rule of law in a generation.”

Tuesday’s debate was immediately followed by the 23rd anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Harris joined President Joe Biden at multiple ceremonies.

Trump also attended events in New York City and Shanksville, Pennsylvania, accompanied by far-right activist and 9/11 conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer. He defended her at his press conference Friday, calling her a “free spirit.”

Several Republicans have criticized Loomer in recent days.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

José Patiño, a 35-year-old DACA recipient and Arizona community organizer, says it took him a long time to overcome the fear of sharing his personal information — including his legal status — on social media. (Photo courtesy of José Patiño)

For more than a decade, San-Francisco-based Miguel has been successfully filing renewals for his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) status every two years, at least until 2024.

For some reason, this year, it took more than five months to get approval, during which his enrollment in the program lapsed, leaving him in a legal limbo.

He lost his work visa and was put on temporary unpaid leave for three months from the large professional services company where he’s worked for a decade.

“In those three months, I was trying to do a lot of damage control around getting an expedited process, reaching out to the ombudsman, congressmen — all of the escalation type of actions that I could do,” he said.

He was also being cautious about what he put in his social media and other online postings. Like many, he realized such information could put him at risk in an uncertain political environment around immigration.

“Given my current situation, I try not to brand myself as undocumented, or highlight it as the main component of my identity digitally,” Miguel said.

Miguel, who came to the United States at age 7 with his parents from the Philippines, says he was already mindful about his digital footprint before his DACA protections lapsed. His Facebook and Instagram accounts are set to private, and while amplifying the stories of immigrants is one of his goals, he tries to do so from an allyship perspective, rather than centering his own story.

While his DACA status has now been renewed — reinstating his work permit and protection from deportation — and Miguel is back at work, he’s taking extra precautions about what he posts online and how he’s perceived publicly. It’s the reason that States Newsroom is not using his full name for this story.

Miguel’s company is regulated by the SEC, and has to take a nonpartisan approach on political issues, he said, and that extends to employees. Staying neutral about political issues may be a common rule for many American workers, but it’s more complicated when an issue is a part of your core identity, Miguel said.

“I think that’s been a huge conflicting area in my professional journey,” he said. “It’s the separation and compartmentalization that I have to do to separate my identity — given that it is a very politicized experience — with my actual career and company affiliation.”

Digital footprints + surveillance

It’s not unusual for your digital footprint — the trail of information you create browsing the web or posting on social media — to have real-life ramifications. But if you’re an immigrant in the United States, one post, like or comment on social media could lead to an arrest, deportation or denial of citizenship.

In 2017, the Department of Homeland Security issued a notice saying it would begin tracking more information, including social media handles for temporary visa holders, immigrants and naturalized U.S. citizens in an electronic system. And Homeland Security would store that information.

But in recent years, there’s been more data collection. In 2019, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) was found to have contracted with commercial data brokers like Thomson Reuters’ CLEAR, which has access to information in credit agencies, cellphone registries, social media posts, property records and internet chat rooms, among other sources.

Emails sent by ICE officials were included in a 2019 federal court filing, showing that information accessed via the CLEAR database was used in a 2018 deportation case, the Intercept reported. ICE agents used an address found in CLEAR, along with Facebook posts of family gatherings, to build a case against a man who had been deported from his home in Southern California and then returned. The man had been living in the U.S. since he was 1, worked as a roofer and had children who are U.S. citizens.

Ultimately, a Facebook post showing the man had “checked in” at a Southern California Home Depot in May 2018 led to his arrest. ICE agents monitored the page, waited for him to leave the store, then pulled him over. He was charged with felony illegal reentry.

Ray Ybarra Maldonado, an immigration and criminal attorney in Phoenix, said he’s seen more requests for social media handles in his immigration paperwork filings over the last few years. It can be nerve-wracking to think that the federal government will be combing through a client’s posts, he said, but clients have to remember that ultimately, anything put on the internet is for public consumption.

“We all think when we post something on social media that it’s for our friends, for our family,” Ybarra Maldonado said. “But people have to understand that whatever you put out there, it’s possible that you could be sitting in a room across from a government agent someday asking you a question about it.”

Ybarra Maldonado said he’s seen immigration processes where someone is appealing to the court that they are a moral, upstanding person, but there are screenshots of them from social media posing with guns or drugs.

Ybarra Maldonado suggests that people applying for citizenship or temporary protections consider keeping their social media pages private, and to only connect with people that they know. He also warns that people who share info about their legal status online can be the target of internet scams, as there’s always someone looking to exploit vulnerable populations.

But maintaining a digital footprint can also be a positive thing for his clients, Ybarra Maldonado said. Printouts from social media can provide evidence of the longevity of someone’s residence in the U.S., or show them as an active participant in their community. It’s also a major way that immigrants stay connected to their families and friends in other countries, and find community in the U.S.

Identifying yourself online

For José Patiño, a 35-year-old DACA recipient, that goal of staying connected to his community was the reason he eventually began using his full name online.

When he was 6, Patiño and his mother immigrated from Mexico to join his father in West Phoenix. From the beginning, he said, his parents explained his immigration status to him, and what that meant — he wasn’t eligible for certain things, and at any time, he could be separated from them. If he heard the words “la migra,” or immigration, he knew to find a safe place and hide.

In Patiño’s neighborhood, he described, an ever-present feeling lingered that the many immigrants living there felt limited and needed to be careful. He realized he could work, but it would always be for less money, and he’d have to keep quiet about anything he didn’t agree with. Most people in his neighborhood didn’t use social media or didn’t identify themselves as “undocumented.”

“You don’t want your status to define your whole identity,” he said. “And it’s something that you don’t want a constant reminder that you have limitations and things that you can’t do.”

But like most millennials, when Patiño went to college, he discovered that Facebook was the main way of communicating and organizing. He went “back and forth at least 100 times,” over signing up with the social media platform, and eventually made a profile with no identifying information. He used a nickname and didn’t have a profile photo. Eventually, though, he realized no one would accept his friend requests or let him into groups.

“And then little by little, as I became more attuned to actually being public, social media protected me more — my status — than being anonymous,” he said. “If people knew who I was, they would be able to figure out how to support me.”

Patiño and others interviewed for this story acknowledged that the DACA program is temporary and could change with an incoming federal administration. In his first few months of his presidency in 2017, Donald Trump announced he was rescinding the program, though the Supreme Court later ruled it would stand.

That moment pushed Patiño toward community organizing. He is now very much online as his full self, as he and his wife, Reyna Montoya, run Phoenix-based Aliento, which aims to bring healing practices to communities regardless of immigration status. The organization provides art and healing workshops, assists in grassroots organizing, and provides resources for undocumented students to get scholarships and navigate the federal student aid form.

Now, Patiño said, he would have very personal conversations with anyone considering putting themselves and their status online. The community has gained a lot of positive  exposure and community from immigrants sharing their personal experiences, but it can take a toll, he said. His online presence is now an extension of the work he does at Aliento.

“Basically, I want to be the adult that my 17-, 18-year-old-self needed,” he said. “For me, that’s how I see social media. How can I use my personal social media to provide maybe some hope or some resources with individuals who are, right now, maybe seeing loss or are in the same situation that I was in?”

Tobore Oweh, a 34-year-old Nigerian immigrant who arrived in Maryland when she was 7, has spent the last decade talking about her status online. After she received DACA protections in 2012, she felt like it was a way to unburden some of the pressures of living life without full citizenship, and to find people going through similar things.

“That was like a form of liberation and freedom, because I felt like I was suppressing who I was, and it just felt like this heavy burden around immigration and just like, it’s just a culture to be silent or fear,” Oweh said. “And for me, sharing my story at that time was very important to me.”

She connected with others through UndocuBlack, a multi-generational network of current and former undocumented Black people that shares resources and tools for advocacy. Being open about your status isn’t for everyone, she said, but she’s a naturally bold and optimistic person.

She referred to herself as “DACA-mented,” saying she feels she has the privilege of some protection through the program but knows it’s not a long-term solution. She’s never felt “super safe,” but was uneasier through the Trump administration when he made moves to end the program.

“Everyone with DACA is definitely privileged, but you know, we all are still experiencing this unstable place of like, not knowing,” she said.

Since sharing more of her experiences online, Oweh said she feels a lot more opportunities and possibilities came into her life. Oweh moved to Los Angeles seven years ago and runs a floral business called The Petal Effect. She feels safe in California, as the state has programs to protect immigrants from discrimination through employment, education, small businesses and housing.

For Oweh, it was never a question of if she’d use social media, but rather how she would. She feels the accessibility to community and for sharing resources far outweighs the risks of being public about her status.

“Growing up, it wasn’t like what it is now. I feel like, you know, future generations, or you know, the people that are here now, like we have more access to community than I did growing up just off of social media,” Oweh said. “So it’s been instrumental in amplifying our voices and sharing our stories.”

Being vocal about your status isn’t right for everyone, Beleza Chan, director of development and communications for education-focused Immigrants Rising, told States Newsroom.

Social media, student organizing, protests and blogging led to the passing of the DREAM act and DACA in the last two decades, and those movements were essential to immigrants rights today. But those feelings of security come in waves, she said.

“I think the political climate certainly affects that,” Chan said. “…In the previous years, it was ‘undocumented and unafraid,’ and since Trump, it’s been like ‘you’re undocumented and you’re very afraid to speak up.’”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Migrants wait throughout the night on May 10, 2023, in a dust storm at Gate 42, on land between the Rio Grande and the border wall, hoping they will be processed by immigration authorities before the expiration of Title 42. (Photo by Corrie Boudreaux for Source NM)

It seems absurd to take the time to refute the preposterous claims about immigrants made by Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans in Wisconsin, including U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden and Sen. Ron Johnson. But the campaign of slander targeting vulnerable workers who milk our cows, pick our crops, build our roads and prop up our economy is genuinely dangerous.

Trump hit a new low when he claimed during Tuesday’s presidential debate that “in Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating the pets of the people that live there.”

Kamala Harris’ bemused reaction, laughing and shaking her head, reflected the feelings of a whole lot of viewers who were appalled to hear the former president spreading a racist internet fable from the debate stage. 

This was not a one-off. Outrageous lies about immigrants are the centerpiece of Republican campaigns this year.

On Monday, as Henry Redman reported, Van Orden held a press conference to turn a single criminal case against a Venezuelan immigrant into fodder for his reelection campaign in Wisconsin’s 3rd Congressional District. 

“American citizens’ human rights are being violated. They’re being kidnapped, raped and murdered by criminal, illegal aliens, and it’s just got to stop,” Van Orden declared.

In reality, an extensive study led by Stanford University economist Ran Abramitzky shows that immigrants are significantly less likely to be locked up for serious crimes than people born in the U.S. “From Henry Cabot Lodge in the late 19th century to Donald Trump, anti-immigration politicians have repeatedly tried to link immigrants to crime, but our research confirms that this is a myth and not based on fact,” Abramitzky said.

As dairy farmer John Rosenow, who lives in Van Orden’s district, told Redman, anti-immigrant rhetoric does nothing to help farmers like him, who employ some of the immigrants performing 70% of the labor on Wisconsin dairy farms. Almost all of those workers are not here legally and could be deported at any time, because Congress has failed to enact a visa program for year-round farm work. 

“If there’s one thing you can do to help us [it’s to] tone down the rhetoric,” Rosenow said he told Van Orden’s staff. “They’re doing all the work, and why do we select one person that does something wrong that’s an immigrant and make it like all immigrants are like that person?” Rosenow added. “We don’t do that for Americans. We’ve got plenty of bad white people around here that do bad things, and we don’t extrapolate that to everyone else.”

But stirring up white voters with race-baiting stories about immigrants is a vote-getter, Republicans figure. 

On Wednesday, Wisconsin’s Sen. Johnson joined Senate GOP colleagues in a press conference demanding immediate passage of the SAVE Act “to protect integrity in U.S. elections and ensure only U.S. citizens can vote.” Republicans are threatening to shut down the U.S. government over the non-issue of alleged voting by undocumented immigrants — something that is already a felony. 

Instances of unauthorized immigrants voting are “so rare as to be statistically nonexistent,” Aaron Reichlin-Melnik, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, told the Christian Science Monitor — hardly a “crisis” that merits the extreme measures Johnson and his colleagues are calling for.

For the most part, Democrats have responded to Republican alarmism about immigration by sticking to policy and brushing off the fearmongering and grotesque caricatures of immigrants. Taking the high road might be a smart political strategy, particularly for Harris, who is herself the child of immigrants and the first woman of color with a serious shot at the White House. Like Barack Obama, the first Black president of the United States, Harris has responded to race-baiting attacks by rising above them and encouraging Americans to do likewise, to “turn the page” on ugly, divisive politics, to embrace a big-hearted sense of ourselves as having “more in common than what divides us.” Calling out racism directly is a loser for candidates of color, political consultants advise.

At the same time, Democrats including Harris and Wisconsin’s incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Tammy Baldwin point out — correctly — that Republicans in Congress abandoned a bipartisan border security deal they’d helped negotiate because Trump told them to let it die so he could use immigration as a campaign cudgel.

It’s true that the incident shows the GOP’s lack of seriousness about tackling the U.S. immigration system they are constantly complaining about. But the border security bill also drew a lot of criticism from immigrant rights groups, particularly for the way it turns the U.S. asylum application process into a game of roulette, allowing a future administration to deny asylum protections, and changing the rules on a day to day basis when border crossings exceed a certain threshold.. Harris has pledged to sign it anyway if she’s elected.

That’s too bad, because the bill does nothing to address the issue she was charged with looking into as vice president: the root causes of mass migration. Nor will it stop people from sneaking across the border to fill jobs while employers are desperate for their labor — including on Wisconsin dairy farms. 

These workers are already vulnerable to exploitation. They come here with no legal protections and work long hours for low pay doing back-breaking jobs Americans won’t take. They pay taxes through wage withholdings into social safety net programs they can never access. 

To a lot of citizens they are invisible. Anti-immigrant campaign rhetoric casts them in an ugly glare, focusing resentment on people who are already living in tenuous circumstances. They are not only doing our dirty work, they are boosting the wages of U.S. workers and making our economy stronger.

The injustice of Republicans’ anti-immigrant libel, set beside immigrant contributions to the U.S. economy, is overwhelming. 

Political point-scoring aside, it would be nice to see Democrats stand up more forcefully on this topic, instead of tacitly agreeing with Republicans’ false claims that immigrants are harming our country. Eric Hovde, the Republican challenging Baldwin this year in the U.S. Senate race, claims without evidence that immigrants are causing the lack of affordable housing and driving up the cost of health care. Baldwin has said she supports the bipartisan border security bill and wants to stop fentanyl from crossing the border. 

What we don’t hear enough about is that the big reason migrants pour across our southern border is because employers like the farmers here in Wisconsin demand it. Without those immigrants — if, for example, Trump launched his promised “mass deportation,” sending federal agents door to door to arrest undocumented workers — our dairy industry would go belly-up overnight.  

“Immigrants are driving the U.S. economic boom,” the Washington Post’s Catherine Rampell writes in a recent column. “That is: The United States has escaped recession, hiring growth has exceeded expectation, and inflation has cooled faster than predicted — all largely because immigration has boosted the size of the U.S. labor force. Don’t just take my word for it; ask the Federal Reserve chair or Wall Street economists.”

Van Orden, in his recent press conference, acknowledged the contributions of immigrants to the dairy industry in his district, along with the construction and hospitality industries, and said that’s why he supports the H-2A visa program, which gives temporary visas to migrants to do seasonal farm work in the U.S.

But the H-2A program “means nothing to dairy farmers,” Rosenow told the Examiner, since it doesn’t apply to workers who labor year-round on dairy farms, as well as in all of the other industries Van Orden mentioned.

Instead of scapegoating, we owe hard-working immigrants a debt of gratitude. And we need to listen to employers like Rosenow, who are asking politicians to show some common decency and come up with policy solutions that acknowledge what they’ve known for decades: Our country benefits tremendously from immigrants. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE