Even though there exists some people who might conjure up the thought that they traveled to the US by way of the infamous Mayflower, there are a small number of us who are far removed from the roots of immigration. 50 years ago, John F. Kennedy echoed the sentiments of many, that America is “a nation of immigrants,” which was further elucidated in his book of the same title. Today, that tone still rings true; even if some didn’t act on the vision or courage to take a chance, many— including our great grandparents, grandparents and parent made that brave journey. Those who made said journey were a diverse set of people and the cornerstone of what made America great and remains an integral and fundamental source of her strength.
Puzzlingly, immigration is a current issue that is at the center of many political debates in the United States; especially, in the “Trump era”. Prior to what we now know as a global economy —with technology and phenomenal communication anchoring the frightening pace of commercialization— America was the world’s place of assembly. She did not amass the word’s elite and wealthy, but she was attracted to the oppressed, enslaved and rejected who came with phenomenal faith. History will never erase the fact that this nation was built on the back of slaves and the slaughtering of native Indians. Sadly, those who are assiduously trying to slam the door of immigration behind them are those who know not the history of this blessed country or wickedly, trying to rewrite it with lies and fear.
Within this new era of policy-making —which is anti-immigrant (illegal and legal)— the Trump administration has ushered in their own interpretation of who should be allowed to enter and who should go back from whence they came. The Trump administration, which serves under a conservative agenda, has drafted several “un-American” policies, which followed up Donald Trump’s forceful anti-immigrant rhetoric during his pre-president campaign. Immigration was at the centerpiece of his contentious campaign as he gave a more detailed policy agenda regarding this subject than any other issue (Pierce & Selee, 2018).
His stance against immigration was facilitated by fear mongering, in that people, specifically Mexicans, were undesirables, and crossing the borders illegally to commit rape, murder and other atrocities to the detriment of American Citizens. His attack was not only limited to Mexicans, but Central Americans, Africans, West Indians, Muslims and other “brown colored” people were subjected to his constant vitriol. Sure, we all are aware that the U.S. has had difficulty controlling the border. The U.S. government has spent millions of dollars on securing the border, but it remains a challenge to do so, especially along the 2,000- mile stretch between the U.S. and Mexico, where fencing is only a band-aide solution (Conan, 2010).
How do we strike a balance, in terms of securing our borders while protecting the civil rights of immigrants? Surely, the United States has the right to defend and secure its borders, but it also has a right and an obligation to protect and promote the basic, human rights and core freedoms of all migrants, particularly the less vulnerable (women and children) irrespective of the immigration status. This obligation reestablishes the solemn responsibility of States, in compliance with the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the international instruments to which they are party” (Human Rights Council, 2015).
Recent actions by the Trump administration seems to be in violation of those human rights laws set out by Council. The well-publicized action of border agents separating parents from their children at the border and putting them in cages is a gross disregard and full disrespect of such parameters. Women are one of the most vulnerable populations in terms of modern-day immigration policy. The Migration Policy Institute assessed that the percentage of female immigrants stands at 51 percent of the general immigration population, with roughly 21.2 million immigrant women living in America from an aggregate immigrant total of 41.3 million which is higher than any other country, globally, and represents 48 percent ((Ruiz, Zong, & Batalova, 2017).
It is no secret that many of the women who are making that brave and courageous trip across the U.S. border are escaping persecution and inconceivable distress in their native lands but sadly, the relief that they so desperately seek in the “land of the free” offers no relief whenever they arrive. Instead of receiving sympathy, upon seeking refuge, these women are thrust into a dark web of this administration’s unfathomable and inhumane bureaucracy. Undocumented pregnant immigrants are the most vulnerable of the population. Babies born to undocumented females have been steadily rising since 2003 and these women have no access to prenatal care, let alone insurance and health care (Passel & Cohn, 2011).
Since 2012, it has been estimated that 11.4 million undocumented immigrants have been residing in America without the proper access to health care because they are unable to pay. There is not much coverage for undocumented women in terms of maternal or prenatal care from the health care system, especially during childbirth. Undocumented immigrants are sometimes recipients of emergency health care services, not limited to childbirth via the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. Notwithstanding, prenatal and postpartum attention are not part of such federal policy (Baker & Rytina, 2013).
Another problem is that undocumented immigrants are unable to prove legal residence in certain states and therefore unable to get a driver’s license. This restriction of movement affects the autonomy of space. Allowing undocumented women to acquire driver’s license will assist law enforcement officers to more readily provide public safety by accessing traffic data bases of motorists, thus limiting the possibility of someone fleeing the scene of an accident. Then, there is a case to be made for those women who face trauma from assault, persecution, anti-immigrant sentiments. Guatemala, El Salvador and Mexico make up most of these migrants and they face so much peril en route to the U.S. because there is this constant threat of danger by way of kidnapping, rape and violence (Reichel, 2018).
Usually, there are more women than men who make the treacherous journey to cross the border and thus they are at severe risk to be targeted for rape and assault. However, because of their illegal status, they are reluctant in coming forward because they are afraid of being deported. Even though there is not much statistics available to cover the severity of violence against undocumented women, still, there are academics who have voiced their concerns through research (Reichel, 2018).
Immigration policies has ebbed and flowed between restrictive or promotive over the years, particularly when there is a change of government aligned to either democrats or republicans. National quotas were introduced during the progressive era where America’s main immigration flow changed from western and northern European countries towards eastern and southern Europe. As a result, laws were introduced in 1921 and 1924, in an attempt to bring back previous immigration flow by placing a limit on total annual immigration, and injecting numerical quotas based on nationality— that was in favor of immigrants from western and northern Europe (Cohn, 2015).
Chinese exclusion act and other exclusionist acts grew out of eugenics and racialism where it became an epidemic that was accepted widely by a paranoid society. These acts were immersed in a legal agenda that catered to the promotion of segregation, sterilization, euthanasia and most important, was aimed at restricting immigration. This era is a much-overlooked darker side of American history. These immigration restrictions, which stood for years, began to fall apart in 1943, when legislation facilitated a small number of Chinese to immigrate. Asians could be given visas (limited amount) because of a 1952 legislation, which also, formally, removed race as reasons for exclusion; even though, Congress rejected a presidential commission which recommended the removal of the national-origins quota system (Cohn, 2015).
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 which was ushered in by the signature of President Lyndon B. Johnson at the base of the Statue of Liberty had far-reaching implications that are much in evidence today and continue to hold up the present immigration system. This legislation instigated tremendous demographic forces which are still in evidence today and continue to shape the United States presently and years to come. The monumental and historic significance of the 1965 law was to bring a semblance of balance to the unjust and discriminatory national-origins quotas that was in effect since the 1920s, which basically favored immigrants from Europe while drastically limiting the admittance of immigrants from Africa, the Middle East, Asia and some parts of Europe (Chishti, Chishti, Hipsman, & Ball, 2017).
Currently, the Trump administration is carrying out its draconian efforts by no longer seeking to automatically release pregnant immigrants from detention which continues their overall effort of holding a greater number of immigrants in custody than previous administrations. This policy shift could be a catalyst for more vulnerable pregnant women to be retained in detention facilities while they wait in sub-human cages for drawn-out court proceedings that will decide their fate based on deportation or a stay of execution. The action of this administration has had many immigration advocates up in arms about its effort to detain more immigrants in detention centers, especially those who are being arrested for non-criminal activities and are basically arrested because of their status (Kopan, 2018).
Under the new directives, ICE agents will no longer follow previous protocol of releasing pregnant women in custody, whether they are undocumented or not subject to removal proceedings. The previous Obama administration policy required officers to facilitate the assumption that a pregnant woman could be released if not for extenuating and difficult situations. There have been numerous calls for this practice to be halted, especially from the Women's Refugee Commission who has been a constant critic of the administration’s treatment of undocumented women, especially those who are pregnant (Kopan, 2018).
They lament the conditions of the detention centers as totally unfit, unhealthy, dangerous and inappropriate pregnant women. There is a level of disregard for the numerous women who may have become pregnant through rape from their journeys to the U.S. or associated with asylum claim. These experiences by these women are significantly traumatic for women who have conceived and even more frightening and traumatic for those who are victims of rape and those who victimized simply because they are women (Kopan, 2018).
Legal immigrants are also affected by new policy (as of Sept. 12) that allows the denial of green cards/visas simply for a lack of proper documentation or mistakes in application. The Obama administration used to allow immigration officers to issue notices that allowed applicants to adjust or correct the errors of their application instead of denying the process. Indeed, officers can still elect to do just that, but they can also choose not to and overlook that step if they determine the application to be frivolous (Surana, 2018).
What this means is that applicants that are void of such notices will not have the opportunity to mediate prior to a decision being made, which, potentially, could add months or possibly years of additional paperwork combined with spending thousands of dollars in extra fees to an already exhausting procedure. The other scenario rests with those who are attempting to renew their visas while residing in America— they are in jeopardy of being placed in removal proceedings once their visas expire. This translates to a feeling of insecurity for those who are here legally and are doing everything according to what the law requires. Now, they feel powerless, unsettled, uncertain, unwanted and unwelcome much akin to those who are undocumented (Surana, 2018).
There is no doubt that the plights of undocumented immigrant women are plenty as they face enormous challenges such as the risk of losing their American-born children while in custody or even after being sent back to their native country. Immigrant domestic workers constantly face tremendous racial discrimination, insults and abuse from their employers, and a great number of these women are also sold or trafficked into the country for exploitation such as sexual and other unimaginable acts. Looking towards the future, we continue to hope that future leaders of our beloved nation will begin to draft immigration reform proposals that collectively protect and promote the basic human rights of women, especially those who are seeking a better life for their family and themselves, be they legal or undocumented.