{"id":11160,"date":"2021-03-01T16:45:46","date_gmt":"2021-03-01T14:45:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/?p=11160"},"modified":"2021-03-01T16:54:22","modified_gmt":"2021-03-01T14:54:22","slug":"on-migrant-rights-joe-biden-still-has-a-long-way-to-go","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/2021\/03\/on-migrant-rights-joe-biden-still-has-a-long-way-to-go\/","title":{"rendered":"On Migrant Rights, Joe Biden Still Has a Long Way to Go"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
Jacobin<\/a>, originally published on 02.28.2021.<\/p>\n

An interview with ADAM GOODMAN.<\/a><\/p>\n

By Luke Savage.<\/p>\n

The Biden administration has made some encouraging noises on immigration policy.\u00a0 But activists are tired of talk \u2014 they want to see action. The Biden administration has already disappointed immigrant rights activists with its choice to preserve much of Trump\u2019s punitive expulsion policy \u2014 including \u201ckids in cages.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/section>\n

<\/section>\n
<\/section>\n
<\/section>\n
<\/section>\n
<\/section>\n
<\/section>\n<\/section>\n
\n
\n
\n

\"An

An Influx Care Facility (ICF) for unaccompanied migrant children on Sunday, February 21, 2021, in Carrizo Springs, TX. (Sergio Flores \/ The Washington Post via Getty Images)<\/p><\/div>

<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n<\/header>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

After news\u00a0broke<\/a>\u00a0in the\u00a0Washington Post<\/em>\u00a0about the Biden administration\u2019s reopening of a Trump-era camp in Carrizo Springs, Texas, used to detain migrant children, criticism from immigration advocates was swift. Linda Brandmiller, a San Antonio\u00ad\u2013based immigration lawyer who represents unaccompanied minors, told the\u00a0Post<\/em>: \u201cIt\u2019s unnecessary, it\u2019s costly, and it goes absolutely against everything [President] Biden promised he was going to do.\u201d The news also prompted criticism from elected representatives like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who\u00a0remarked<\/a>,<\/u>\u00a0\u201cThis is not okay, never has been okay, never will be okay \u2014 no matter the administration or party.\u201d The White House, for its part, has categorically denied comparisons between the facility and the brutal migrant policies of the Trump era.<\/p>\n

Adam Goodman is an assistant professor in the Latin American and Latino Studies Program and in the Department of History at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and author of the 2020 book\u00a0The Deportation Machine: America\u2019s Long History of Expelling Immigrants<\/em><\/a>.\u00a0Jacobin<\/em> spoke to Goodman about the news surrounding the reopened Carrizo Springs facility, the recent history of America\u2019s deportation and border policies, and the landscape for immigration reform in the Biden era.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n

\n
\n
LS<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

To begin, it might be useful to clear the ground a bit. There\u2019s obviously too much to cover here in much detail, but I think it might be worth setting the stage with, at very least, some of the recent history of US immigration policy. The issue received a lot of attention during the Trump era because of the administration\u2019s particular penchant for the brutal treatment of migrants. But, as is now pretty widely understood, the Obama-Biden administration\u2019s record when it came to the number of deportations actually exceeded Trump\u2019s. Can you give us a sketch of the recent history of immigration policy in relation to the border, deportations, and detention policies?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
AG<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

The deportation machine has a long bipartisan history. Something I discovered while researching my book is that the United States has deported 57 million people since the 1880s. Mass expulsion has happened under both Democratic and Republican administrations. And we know very little about the majority of them because they\u2019ve happened far from the public eye and with little to no due process.<\/p>\n

In more recent decades, we\u2019ve seen that Democratic administrations have rolled out some of the most punitive policies. The age of mass expulsion began in the late 1970s under Jimmy Carter. From 1978 to 2008, US officials deported an average of 900,000 people every year. Carter\u2019s Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (the precursor to the Department of Homeland Security) was Leonel Castillo, a Mexican American from Houston, Texas, who \u2014 similar to Biden\u2019s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary Alejandro Mayorkas \u2014 pushed for progressive changes and said the right things while also implementing a liberal law-and-order policy that kept the deportation and machine running smoothly.<\/p>\n

Fast forward two decades, and Bill Clinton implemented some of the most punitive immigration and border enforcement policies in recent history. He dramatically increased the number of agents policing the US-Mexico border, increased the number of people eligible for deportation, and expanded the types of minor offenses that could result in one\u2019s removal.<\/p>\n

We need to recognize the ways that Democrats and Republicans have, in large part, been on the same page here. That certainly continued with Barack Obama, who oversaw programs like Secure Communities, which linked local police and law enforcement agencies to the federal immigration bureaucracy and led to a spike in expulsions. Democrats have often said one thing and then acted in a very different way. The Biden administration\u00a0may<\/em>\u00a0break from that pattern, but that remains to be seen.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
LS<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

Earlier this week, the\u00a0Washington Post<\/em>\u00a0reported<\/a>\u00a0that the Biden administration opened its first facility for children \u2014 a facility that was briefly used under Donald Trump in 2019 and has been reopened to hold up to seven hundred children ages thirteen to seventeen.<\/p>\n

The move was very promptly criticized by advocates like Linda Brandmiller, a San Antonio-based immigration lawyer who represents unaccompanied minors. Some elected representatives like AOC have\u00a0criticized<\/a>\u00a0it, too, and White House press secretary Jennifer Psaki was\u00a0asked<\/a>\u00a0about it at a briefing.<\/p>\n

What\u2019s the context for this facility \u2014 both in terms of Biden\u2019s immigration policy and its function within America\u2019s immigration apparatus?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
AG<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

It\u2019s important to recognize that regardless of who\u2019s in power, there\u2019s a certain amount of bureaucratic continuity and inertia at play within DHS. There\u2019s also the problem of implementation of new policies by the rank and file, who have extraordinary discretionary power, which has proven inherently problematic.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s also be clear that these are political decisions. We saw during the pandemic that the number of immigrant detainees dropped from over fifty thousand people to fewer than twenty thousand. And for good reason, because of the dangers that the virus poses to people held in detention. This dramatic reduction made clear that there\u2019s no reason to lock up so many immigrants and asylum seekers.<\/p>\n

So the Biden administration\u2019s announcement this week that they\u2019re reopening this youth facility to keep kids in cages, as critics have described it, puts them in a tough spot. It actually calls to mind the moment in one of the presidential debates when Trump really went in on Biden, asking \u201cWho built the cages, Joe?\u201d and Biden didn\u2019t have a great answer. I\u2019m not siding with Trump here or letting him off the hook for all of the horrible policies his administration implemented or for the all-out war that they waged against immigrants \u2014 and I think it\u2019s important to recognize the ways Trump\u2019s actions differed from those of other administrations.<\/p>\n

But Trump also had a point. The Democrats need to acknowledge the past wrongs they have committed and the ways they\u2019ve contributed to building up this punitive deportation machine. And they need to pivot and stake out new ground. Activists don\u2019t want to hear the Biden administration talk. They want to see it act.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
LS<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

The opening of this facility has, I think quite understandably, prompted a lot of people to draw parallels between what\u2019s happening now and what happened under Donald Trump. There\u2019s been a lot of criticism from the Left, but charges of hypocrisy have also been leveled by various figures on the Right. Are these criticisms and charges of hypocrisy fair?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
AG<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

Mostly, the criticisms coming from the Right are just political attacks designed, perhaps, to justify or whitewash the wrongdoings of the Trump administration. But I think we can do two things at once here. We can recognize the ways that the Trump administration was absolutely abysmal on questions of migration, and also acknowledge the ways that Democrats have supported and implemented inhumane policies. Biden\u2019s time as vice president certainly makes him a part of that history and trajectory.<\/p>\n

But right now, there\u2019s actually an opportunity for Democrats to stake out new ground. One of the things about the Trump era is that immigration politics became more polarized, and that actually creates opportunities. Whether or not it leads to real change is another question. So I think that there\u2019s some legitimacy to the critique even if we can also recognize the instances that it\u2019s not being made in good faith.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
LS<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

The White House press secretary Jennifer Psaki\u00a0categorically denied<\/a>\u00a0the putting \u201ckids in cages\u201d charge. What\u2019s your response specifically to that?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
AG<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

There\u2019s no reason that the Biden administration needs to detain asylum seekers and migrants. Continuing to detain noncitizens, and especially migrant children,\u00a0is<\/em>\u00a0continuing to put people in cages. The administration announced that it plans to end long-term family detention, which is positive, but they haven\u2019t closed the facilities altogether. Activists and critics are pushing Biden, and rightfully so, to live up to his word and to shift the focus away from enforcement \u2014 to not double down on the harmful policies of the past.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
LS<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

Having issued the initial report that prompted this whole discussion, the\u00a0Post<\/em>\u00a0has published several pieces of additional commentary on the newly reopened Carrizo Springs facility. One claim that\u2019s\u00a0been made<\/a>\u00a0is that there\u2019s basically no alternative to detaining minors, with one commentator writing: \u201cThe problem is not the existence of the facility per se: Again, ORR [the Office of Refugee Resettlement] must hold migrant children before placing them, and that\u2019s better than releasing them alone.\u201d What\u2019s your response to that claim?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
AG<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

Part of the problem is that these facilities exist at all. Historically, they have a horrible record when it comes to the well-being of the people being held. Instead, asylum seekers can and should be released into the United States. Many people come to reunite with parents, family members, and people they know. Expediting reunification and processing as many people as quickly as possible instead of holding them in detention for weeks, months, or years (which is actually against US law) would be an obvious alternative. Part of the problem is a general lack of political imagination by the Biden administration. They need to think of new, alternate solutions centered around providing services and support to refugees and asylum seekers.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
LS<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

What\u2019s your overall impression of Biden\u2019s stated plans for immigration reform, and to what extent has the administration given the impression so far that it intends to honor its campaign promises?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
AG<\/abbr><\/strong><\/div>\n
\n

I remain skeptical while also being cautiously optimistic, and there\u2019s reason for both. There\u2019s a dual imperative here for the Biden administration: on the one hand, we need broad, radical changes to the immigration system. That\u2019s essential, and could happen, in part, through the legalization program they\u2019ve proposed to Congress. At the same time, we also need to address the here and now and the needs of the people caught in the deportation machine today. It can\u2019t be one or the other. The Biden administration needs to do both and needs to act quickly. Right now, one month into the Biden administration, tens of thousands of people have been deported. Punitive policies continue to wreak havoc on individuals and families every day that goes by.<\/p>\n

So there\u2019s an urgent need to reform the preexisting system and provide aid to those facing deportation while also pushing for broad changes that go far beyond reversing the damage of the past four years. The best way to abolish ICE, if we want to put it in those terms, would be a widespread legalization program and provisions for future migrants to come via authorized means. Reducing the number of people subject to the deportation machine is key. That would allow the administration to reduce DHS\u2019s enforcement budget and shift the agency\u2019s attention toward providing services.<\/p>\n

These remain open-ended questions. We still don\u2019t know how much follow-through there will be. The Biden administration has made a lot of promises that have sounded encouraging, but we\u2019re already seeing the challenges the administration is facing in making those promises a reality. It\u2019s too early to tell at this point, but what remains clear is that the Biden administration is more susceptible to pressure than the Trump administration was. The key now is to maintain that pressure and to continue organizing for progressive change.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

ABOUT THE AUTHOR<\/strong><\/p>\n

Adam Goodman is a PhD candidate in history at the University of Pennsylvania and is currently a Fulbright-Garc\u00eda Robles fellow in Mexico.<\/p>\n

ABOUT THE INTERVIEWER<\/strong><\/p>\n

Luke Savage is a staff writer at\u00a0Jacobin<\/cite>.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jacobin, originally published on 02.28.2021. An interview with ADAM GOODMAN. By Luke Savage. The Biden administration has made some encouraging noises on immigration policy.\u00a0 But activists are tired of talk \u2014 they want to see […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":19,"featured_media":11162,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[90,85,11,122,88,1,10],"tags":[245,604,145],"class_list":["post-11160","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-editor-selection","category-human-rights","category-issues","category-politics","category-slider","category-uncategorized","category-world","tag-childrens-rights","tag-human-rights","tag-usa"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11160","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/19"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11160"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11160\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11172,"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11160\/revisions\/11172"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11162"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11160"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11160"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/openasia.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11160"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}