Week of August 15–21, 2024

Immigration is a hot topic in U.S. politics, especially during election years. It ranks among the top concerns for voters. As Christians, it’s crucial to remain informed and rooted in the Bible when navigating media narratives. Jesus, who referred to himself as "the way and the truth" (John 14:6), calls for truth to guide us. Below are common immigration myths debunked with facts:

Myth 1: "Immigration harms the economy."

Truth: Immigrants positively impact the economy by filling essential jobs, starting businesses, and paying taxes. Research shows that they contribute more in taxes than they receive in benefits.

Myth 2: "Immigrants increase crime rates."

Truth: Studies indicate that immigrants, including undocumented ones, are less likely to commit crimes than native-born Americans. Areas with more immigrants often have lower crime rates.

Myth 3: "Immigrants take jobs from Americans."

Truth: Immigrants often take jobs Americans avoid, particularly in industries like agriculture and construction. Their presence can help create more jobs overall.

Myth 4: "Seeking asylum at the border is illegal."

Truth: Asylum-seeking is a legal right under U.S. and international law, regardless of how someone enters the country.

Myth 5: "Persecuted Christians aren’t among those seeking asylum."

Truth: Many persecuted Christians seek asylum at the U.S. southern border, fleeing violence and religious persecution, particularly from regions like Central and South America.

The ACLU is urging a potential Harris-Walz administration to fulfill its campaign promise of creating a pathway to citizenship for longtime residents, ending harmful detention practices, and improving access to asylum. Despite immigrants' vital contributions, the current immigration system fails to offer a clear path to legal status, wastes funds on unnecessary detention, and disregards fairness and due process.

If elected, Kamala Harris is encouraged to protect immigrant families through executive action, including expanding Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and preventing deportation of caregivers. Additionally, the ACLU urges reforms to modernize the asylum system, ensuring fairness and safety for those fleeing persecution. They also call for the closure of abusive detention facilities and reducing reliance on private and contract centers.

The Biden administration's immigration policies are criticized for maintaining restrictive measures that limit asylum access and fail to address the humanitarian crisis at the border. In contrast, the ACLU emphasizes that a Harris administration should prioritize humane immigration reforms that reflect American values and the will of the people, including a balanced approach to asylum and effective border management.

ACLU experts see a Harris presidency as an opportunity to restore a fair and orderly immigration system that benefits both immigrants and American communities.

Research on immigration in the U.S. often debates its impact on public safety, jobs, and economic strain. CU Denver economists Chloe East, Hani Mansour, and Andrea Velásquez aim to clarify these issues. Their study focuses on the economic impact of Secure Communities, an immigration enforcement policy active from 2008 to 2014, which deported over 450,000 undocumented immigrants.

The researchers found that such policies affect not only immigrants but also U.S. citizens by altering economic and social dynamics. Immigrants play a crucial role in the economy, and policies targeting them can lead to unintended consequences, such as disrupting immigrant communities and deterring interaction with public services. Mansour emphasizes that these policies, which expanded local police powers, often led to the removal of immigrants with minor infractions, instilling fear across immigrant communities.

Their findings challenge common perceptions, showing that undocumented immigrants do not harm the labor market. Instead, they enable businesses to grow and increase job opportunities for U.S. workers. East highlights how reduced migration during the COVID-19 pandemic led to significant labor shortages, especially in sectors dominated by immigrants.

The researchers hope their work encourages policy decisions based on data, not fear, arguing for more inclusive immigration policies that can benefit both the economy and society by fostering diversity and reducing uncertainty.

As climate change increasingly drives displacement, legal advocates are pushing to protect climate-displaced individuals. However, a recent U.S. court decision has dealt a setback to these efforts. On July 1, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled against Cruz Galicia, a Guatemalan asylum seeker citing climate change impacts. The court determined that “climate refugees” did not qualify as a particular social group, setting a negative precedent for similar asylum claims in the U.S.

While disheartening, this decision highlights the need for stronger legal strategies. Current U.S. asylum law protects those fleeing persecution based on race, religion, nationality, social group, or political opinion. Advocates argue that asylum claims should connect climate impacts with other forms of persecution, such as in the case of Francisco, a Garífuna environmental activist fleeing persecution in Honduras. His case presents a stronger legal theory by combining climate impacts with racial and political persecution.

Despite setbacks, progress is being made internationally. In 2024, historic hearings in Barbados and Brazil explored how international human rights law can address climate displacement. Advocates are also advancing efforts like the Climate Justice Collaborative, which seeks to empower those most affected by climate change.

While legal challenges will continue, these efforts represent crucial opportunities to adapt asylum and refugee protections to address the growing threat of climate displacement.

Two immigration bills filed for Alabama's 2025 legislative session have sparked criticism from immigrant rights groups. HB 7, introduced by Rep. Ernie Yarbrough, R-Trinity, would allow local law enforcement to partner with federal agencies to enforce immigration laws, while HB 3, proposed by Rep. Chip Brown, R-Hollinger's Island, seeks harsher penalties for undocumented immigrants convicted of crimes, especially those involving minors.

Critics argue these bills could lead to racial profiling and erode community trust. Allison Hamilton, director of the Alabama Coalition for Immigrant Justice, says HB 7 encourages law enforcement to arrest people based on suspicions of immigration status, which could harm relations in communities already struggling with crime. She also pointed out that it’s impossible to determine someone's immigration status by appearance alone.

HB 3 increases penalties for undocumented immigrants convicted of crimes, raising concerns that it unfairly targets this population. Studies consistently show that immigrants, including undocumented ones, are less likely to commit crimes than U.S.-born citizens. Immigrant advocates highlight that immigrants contribute significantly to society through taxes and essential labor, yet remain marginalized by such legislation.

The bills follow a historical trend of Alabama’s stringent immigration laws, including the 2011 HB 56, much of which was later overturned by federal courts.

The American Psychological Association (APA) has adopted a resolution endorsing a population health-based approach to working with immigrants. This approach addresses various factors influencing immigrants' health, such as cultural, economic, and environmental contexts. Passed on August 7, the resolution was approved by APA’s Council of Representatives with a vote of 156-6.

The resolution highlights the role psychologists play in understanding immigrant challenges, condemning harmful policies like forced family separation. It calls for federal and state funding to research immigrant health needs and encourages community-based programs to improve immigrant well-being. APA President Cynthia de las Fuentes, PhD, emphasized the importance of culturally responsive psychological support for immigrants.

The council also accepted a report from a task force on immigration, which underscores the critical role of psychological science in addressing immigrant mental health. The report, titled Psychological Science and Immigration Today, reveals that while immigrants are vulnerable to mental health challenges, they develop resilience strategies that can benefit U.S. healthcare. The report also highlights the harmful effects of anti-immigrant policies and discrimination on immigrant health.

De las Fuentes stressed the need for mental health professionals to contribute to the integration of immigrants and adapt their services to different cultural contexts. The report serves as a call to action for psychologists to advance research, clinical practice, and advocacy that supports immigrant communities.

Starting Monday, August 19, immigrant spouses and stepchildren of U.S. citizens can apply for parole in place, offering temporary legal status and a potential path to citizenship. This is part of the Biden administration’s Keeping Families Together initiative. Previously, many immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally had to leave and reapply from their home countries.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) estimates that about 500,000 spouses and 50,000 stepchildren may be eligible. However, not all are qualified. Cesar Espinosa of FIEL emphasizes the importance of verifying eligibility.

To qualify, noncitizen spouses must have continuously lived in the U.S. since June 17, 2014, and have been married to a U.S. citizen by June 17, 2024. Stepchildren must also meet similar criteria, including being under 21 and unmarried on that date. Applicants must also pass background checks and have no disqualifying criminal history.

Immigration attorney Renata Castro advises consulting licensed professionals, warning against unqualified individuals exploiting immigrant communities.

For residents in Houston, FIEL offers assistance with the application process. Espinosa notes that their organization has experienced attorneys to help as many people as possible navigate this opportunity.

Migration has steadily increased over recent decades, with over 280 million international migrants today, making up 3.6% of the global population. According to Pew Research Center's 2020 analysis of UN data and 270 censuses and surveys, Christians comprise the largest share, making up 47% of all migrants. Muslims follow at 29%, with Hindus at 5%, Buddhists at 4%, and Jews at 1%. The religiously unaffiliated, including atheists and agnostics, account for 13% of the global migrant population.

The number of people living outside their country of birth has increased by 83% in the past 30 years, surpassing the global population growth rate of 47%. This report examines the total number, or stock, of migrants living internationally rather than focusing on annual migration flows. It counts all individuals currently living outside their birth country, regardless of when they left.

Although migration flows can fluctuate due to wars, economic crises, and natural disasters, the overall stock of international migrants changes more gradually. Consequently, the religious composition of migrants has remained relatively stable since 1990, even with year-to-year shifts in migration patterns.

In his recent commentary for City Journal, Christopher F. Rufo presents a perspective on mass immigration in London, arguing that it threatens British civilization and has left the city a "hollow shell." Rufo describes a transformation of the city driven by an influx of non-white populations, particularly Muslims, claiming their presence marks a visceral decline in British identity. He cites visual cues, such as women in niqabs and sub-Saharan Africans demanding reparations, to support his claims about cultural incompatibility.

Rufo's argument hinges on the notion that the increase in diversity signals an erosion of British culture, though he provides no empirical evidence for his assertions. His comments reflect a xenophobic viewpoint, implying that non-white individuals are inherently detrimental to society. Despite acknowledging the complexity of cultural integration, he simplistically concludes that the city feels different because of these populations, equating this change to a loss of national identity.

The lack of concrete evidence to support his claims exposes the emotional underpinning of his argument. Rufo's perspective is emblematic of a broader right-wing narrative that evokes fear of immigration without substantiating the alleged threats to societal structures. His work serves as a case study in how biased propaganda can shape perceptions about immigration, emphasizing feelings over facts while ignoring the lived experiences of those he critiques.

A new federal immigration law, "Parole in Place," took effect on August 19, simplifying citizenship access for eligible individuals. To qualify, applicants must have resided in the U.S. for ten years and be married to a U.S. citizen as of June 17, 2024. Attorney Paul Woody Scott emphasized that this law allows individuals to apply for a green card without leaving the U.S. to do so at a consulate.

The law provides a three-year parole status upon approval, meaning applicants are not considered unlawfully present during this time. They can also apply for work permits, which enable access to Social Security and driver's licenses. Additionally, the process is expected to be quicker than traditional immigration routes.

However, there are risks involved. Scott noted that a change in presidential administration could affect the law's implementation. Applicants must provide extensive personal information, including fingerprints and background checks, which could be jeopardized if policies change.

While many might assume this law primarily benefits Hispanic individuals, it actually impacts anyone from other countries who meet the qualifications.

Two months into his presidency, Joe Biden faced a crisis as illegal border crossings surged. He tasked Vice President Kamala Harris with diplomatic efforts to improve conditions in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to reduce migration driven by poverty and violence. Republicans quickly labeled her the "border czar," making her a target for criticism as she runs for president amid disapproval of the administration's border policies.

While migration from these Central American countries decreased by 35% during Biden's tenure, analysts find it hard to link this drop directly to Harris's efforts. Instead, increased enforcement in Mexico is largely responsible for the reduced numbers. Harris has framed herself as tough on immigration, pointing to her background as a prosecutor in California. Despite her limited role in border management, Harris has defended her record against criticism from Republicans, including Donald Trump, who blames her for ongoing challenges at the border.

The Biden administration has struggled with a polarized Congress, hindering comprehensive immigration reform. Despite declining apprehensions this year, challenges remain, as migration from other regions rises. Harris continues to advocate for strict border policies and has highlighted her commitment to increasing resources for border security if elected president. Her campaign emphasizes a tough approach, underscoring her legal background and support for significant border control measures.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against FIEL (Familias Inmigrantes y Estudiantes en la Lucha), an immigrant rights organization in Houston, claiming it violated federal rules regarding nonprofit political involvement by criticizing former President Donald Trump, Gov. Greg Abbott, and a new immigration law. Paxton's lawsuit, filed in Harris County District Court, seeks to dissolve FIEL, which provides education and legal services to immigrant families.

This lawsuit marks a significant move, as it targets a nonprofit far from the Texas-Mexico border and focuses on political speech. FIEL’s Executive Director, Cesar Espinosa, described the timing of the lawsuit as an added burden, arriving just as they were recovering from Hurricane Beryl's damage to their office.

The state alleges that FIEL violates rules against nonprofit political participation, citing social media posts opposing Trump's immigration policies and advocating against Texas Senate Bill 4, which allows police to arrest individuals suspected of illegal entry. Paxton's office seeks a temporary injunction against FIEL and permanent dissolution.

FIEL’s legal team contends that the lawsuit is retaliatory, as the organization is involved in federal lawsuits challenging Texas election laws, including one against Paxton. They argue that the lawsuit represents a misuse of power targeting a group exercising its First Amendment rights. Advocacy groups, like the ACLU of Texas, condemn Paxton’s actions as an attempt to intimidate and silence organizations supporting immigrant rights.

When President Joe Biden exited the presidential race in July, many hoped the focus on immigration would diminish. However, Republicans, led by Donald Trump, quickly shifted their attacks to Vice President Kamala Harris, branding her a failed “border czar.” In response, Harris countered at a rally in Arizona, accusing Trump of being more interested in rhetoric than in fixing border security.

Despite the leadership change, immigration remains a key issue for the 2024 election. Trump has repeatedly labeled the situation at the southern border a “crisis,” despite data showing increased migrant apprehensions under both his and Biden's administrations. He aims to reinstate strict immigration policies if reelected, including a significant deportation effort.

The Biden-Harris administration has attempted to project strength on immigration, with Harris highlighting her efforts as California's attorney general against drug cartels and human traffickers. However, the administration's policies, including restrictions on asylum for migrants crossing the border, have drawn mixed responses.

On refugee policy, Biden has significantly increased the admission cap compared to Trump’s record lows, welcoming over 68,000 refugees in fiscal 2024 alone. Additionally, while Trump has sought to dismantle the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, Harris has committed to fortifying it.

Comprehensive immigration reform has faced roadblocks, primarily from Republican opposition. Harris supported bipartisan efforts earlier this year and would prioritize reform if elected. The evolving dynamics of the immigration debate suggest that how Harris navigates this issue will be critical in the campaign ahead.

U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar of El Paso criticized Donald Trump and Republicans for using border issues to gain political advantage rather than seeking real solutions to security and immigration challenges. Speaking at the Democratic National Convention, Escobar emphasized her deep connection to the border, stating, “The border is my beloved home, the place where my children grew up. Forget what you hear on the news. I’m from there. When it comes to the border, hear me when I say, you know nothing, Donald Trump.”

Escobar, who is a national co-chair for the Kamala Harris-Tim Walz campaign, accused Republicans of relying on “demonization and bluster,” contrasting this with the Democrats' commitment to finding solutions. She asserted that under Kamala Harris's leadership, America could strengthen legal immigration pathways, enhance border security, and treat those seeking a better life with dignity. Escobar’s remarks aimed to shift the narrative surrounding immigration and border security toward a more compassionate and constructive approach.

International students, once vital for universities in advanced economies, now face an uncertain future as governments tighten immigration policies. In the UK, the Labour Party has upheld a ban on international students bringing dependents, a major source of migration. The Netherlands is restricting foreign students’ access to universities, driven by rising anti-foreign sentiment and housing shortages. Canada is reducing student visas, especially for smaller colleges, affecting thousands of jobs and leaving many students in precarious situations.

The decline in international enrollments is evident, with visa data showing drops of 20-30% in the UK, Canada, and Australia in early 2024. These changes are framed as efforts to enhance education quality but are seen as politically motivated amid rising concerns over immigration.

In the US, however, the crackdown in other markets has made it the preferred destination for international students, with enrollments rising by 11.5% in 2022-23. While foreign students significantly contribute to local economies—over $200 billion globally—the political landscape is shifting against immigration.

Countries like the UK and Australia rely heavily on international student tuition for funding, and significant reductions could threaten their financial stability. As governments balance economic benefits against public sentiment, international education's future remains precarious amid changing political tides.