Week of January 8–14, 2025

Experts warn of stricter enforcement, slower processing, and visa restrictions

Employers should prepare for significant changes to employment-based immigration under the incoming Trump administration. Experts predict increased worksite enforcement, slower processing times, restrictions on employment-based visas, and a rollback of Biden-era policies.

During his 2024 campaign, President-elect Donald Trump outlined plans for mass deportations of undocumented workers and the reversal of Biden-era initiatives, such as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Temporary Protected Status (TPS), which benefit hundreds of thousands of workers. With Congressional immigration legislation expected to remain stalled, the Trump administration will likely issue a series of executive orders and regulatory changes, restoring policies from his first term. This includes stricter eligibility criteria for temporary work visas and employment-based green cards.

Julia Gelatt of the Migration Policy Institute expects increased scrutiny of applications, a greater focus on fraud detection, slower immigration processing, and more country-specific travel bans. Cecilia Esterline from the Niskanen Center warns of intensified policies, while Andrew Wilson, an immigration attorney, suggests a return to discussions on a merit-based immigration system.

Employers should brace for changes to hiring practices and compliance responsibilities. Denise Gavica Perez from Akerman advises preparation for stricter enforcement, particularly with E-Verify, I-9 compliance, and work authorization processes. Other potential actions include revising the H-1B visa program, advocating for mandatory E-Verify registration, and increasing worksite inspections and I-9 audits, especially in industries like agriculture and meat processing. Many of these policies may face legal challenges, as seen during Trump’s first term.

Immigration reform is expected to be a top priority for the Trump administration, with significant implications for U.S. students and schools. Experts from Brookings, Tara Watson and Jonathon Zars, have outlined potential paths for the incoming administration, predicting “high-profile enforcement events” early in its tenure to signal a shift in immigration policy.

These actions could deeply affect millions of U.S. students, including those from immigrant families and those directly impacted by changes in immigration law. Educational leaders are particularly concerned about how these reforms might influence students' ability to access higher education, remain in the U.S., or face disruptions due to changes in visa and deportation policies.

Given the administration's stance on immigration, schools and universities may need to prepare for shifts in enrollment trends, changes in student demographics, and a heightened need for legal and psychological support services for students affected by potential policy changes.

To better understand what the future holds and how educational institutions can respond, we consulted with experts who focus on the intersection of immigration and education. These experts highlighted the importance of staying informed about policy developments, maintaining open communication with immigrant families, and preparing support systems to address the potential challenges students might face under the new administration’s immigration agenda.

Educational leaders must be proactive in advocating for policies that protect students' rights while also being ready to adapt to the evolving landscape of immigration reform.

Acres of unpicked oranges dotted Kern County this week as word spread of Border Patrol raids targeting laborers. Federal agents conducted unannounced sweeps in Bakersfield, focusing on places where day laborers gather, such as Home Depot and a gas station popular with field workers. Images of detained individuals circulated widely on social media, causing widespread panic.

This was the first significant Border Patrol raid in California since Donald Trump’s election, and it sparked fears about the future of immigration enforcement. The raids began shortly after Congress certified the presidential election results, highlighting Trump's promises for mass deportations. Many workers, fearing for their safety, stayed home, causing severe disruptions to the local agricultural industry.

Store manager Sara Fuentes witnessed the raids firsthand and described how agents targeted field workers, detaining individuals who appeared to be laborers while ignoring others. Workers did not return to the gas station the following day, underscoring the anxiety that gripped the community. Antonio De Loera-Brust from the United Farm Workers noted that workers were avoiding public spaces, with many missing work altogether.

Local growers expressed concern about the long-term impact on the agricultural sector, which relies heavily on immigrant labor. With many workers staying home, agriculture experts predicted that food shortages and higher prices could result from ongoing raids. Additionally, experts warned of the economic consequences for small businesses and industries reliant on immigrant labor in Kern County.

Who runs the U.S. immigration system? If the Senate passes the Laken Riley Act, the answer may shift from Congress or the president to state attorneys general, such as Texas' Ken Paxton. The bill, which has already passed in the House, could grant state officials significant influence over federal immigration policy.

A little-discussed provision in the bill would allow federal courts in states like Texas and Louisiana to hear lawsuits that could lead to sweeping visa bans on countries like India and China. State officials could also seek court orders to force the government to deport individuals without the approval of ICE officers.

Currently, immigration authority is a federal matter. Granting states veto power over key decisions could complicate immigration enforcement and create a patchwork system of policies across the nation. This could lead to conflicts with international partners and potential diplomatic issues.

The Laken Riley Act is named after a nursing student murdered by Jose Ibarra, a Venezuelan migrant who crossed the border in 2022. The bill was introduced after the crime, using Ibarra's case to link immigration to criminal activity and criticize the Biden administration. Supporters argue the bill would increase safety, while critics warn it could undermine federal authority and lead to destabilizing consequences both domestically and abroad.

Labor productivity, a key measure of economic health, has been rising steadily since 2023, driven by an increase in real nonfarm business output relative to total hours worked. However, concerns have emerged that inaccuracies in measuring labor force participation, particularly regarding immigration, may present an overly optimistic view of economic performance.

A recent analysis revealed that the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey (CPS), a critical tool for understanding labor market trends, significantly undercounted recent immigrants. Between January 2022 and October 2024, the CPS reported a net increase of 3.94 million immigrants, whereas the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated the true number to be 8.65 million. This discrepancy suggests the CPS may be missing a substantial portion of the immigrant workforce, potentially skewing labor statistics.

Despite these concerns, the impact of this undercount on the unemployment rate is minimal. The CPS defines recent immigrants as those who arrived in the past two or three years, depending on the survey year. Although recent immigrants tend to have higher unemployment rates than both U.S. natives and earlier immigrants, they make up a small portion of the labor force. Even if the "missing" immigrants were included, the aggregate unemployment rate would increase by only 0.10 percentage points, from 4.14% to 4.24%.

These findings highlight the importance of accurate immigration data but suggest that even with the undercount, the broader labor market remains largely unaffected.

The UK Home Office has introduced new policies that significantly impact employers sponsoring international talent, particularly Skilled Workers. Starting January 8, 2025, non-European nationals will be required to apply for the Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) before traveling to the UK, marking a major change in the immigration process.

Along with this, the UK government has updated sponsorship cost policies. From December 31, 2024, employers will no longer be allowed to pass on certain sponsorship costs to Skilled Workers, including the Sponsor Licence Fee and Certificate of Sponsorship Fee. This is part of an effort to reduce worker exploitation and financial burden. However, other costs such as visa application fees and Immigration Health Surcharges can still be charged to workers. Employers failing to comply risk having their sponsor licence revoked, leading to financial losses and operational disruptions.

Employers should update internal policies, employment contracts, and budget for potential changes to immigration costs. Additionally, they need to ensure that affected employees have the necessary ETAs for travel starting in 2025 to avoid delays or entry refusals.

The ETA scheme will be mandatory for non-European nationals from January 8, 2025, and for European nationals from April 2025. It is important to note that the ETA does not grant the right to work in the UK, and those seeking employment must obtain the appropriate visa.

Employers should also prepare for the European Travel Information and Authorisation System, impacting UK nationals traveling to the Schengen Area.

As President-elect Donald Trump promises mass deportations starting January 20, uncertainty is rising for immigrants across the U.S. While state lawmakers have limited power over federal immigration policies, Washington state is considering a bill to support immigrants working without legal authorization. Senator Rebecca Saldaña, D-Seattle, is reintroducing a proposal to help these workers access unemployment insurance.

Washington acknowledges the crucial role immigrants play in meeting state and national labor needs. However, the bill raises concerns about costs, privacy, and employer liability. Saldaña emphasizes the need for a state program to protect immigrant workers in light of potential federal hostility. Over 156,000 unauthorized immigrants work in Washington, many in agriculture, hospitality, construction, and retail.

The proposal seeks to create a state fund for workers who do not qualify for standard unemployment insurance due to their immigration status. These workers could access funds if they lose employment through no fault of their own. The program would run through a third-party system to lower costs, protect workers’ identities, and avoid employer liability.

Colorado became the first state to implement a similar program in 2022, dedicating $15 million annually to assist residents regardless of immigration status. Washington’s program would cost an estimated $100 million in the first two-year cycle and benefit around 5,300 workers annually. While business groups prefer changes to immigration laws to allow legal immigration, advocates argue the unemployment program is crucial for protecting immigrant workers during tough times.

In the Fall 2024 edition of the AILA Law Journal, Sandra Grossman and Ted R. Bromund updated their 2019 article on INTERPOL Red Notices, reflecting significant developments over the past five years. The article highlights the growing awareness and advocacy against INTERPOL abuse, which occurs when nations use INTERPOL to pursue individuals who aren't genuine criminals. Bromund credits some positive changes to advocacy efforts, although challenges remain.

One key development is the increasing recognition in U.S. courts that INTERPOL Red Notices do not meet the probable cause standard. Additionally, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has established guidelines for how Red Notices should be used, though Bromund remains skeptical about ICE's adherence to these guidelines. Despite this, the introduction of legislation to address INTERPOL abuse is a step forward.

However, a fundamental issue persists: INTERPOL's presumption of state legitimacy. When a state requests a Red Notice, INTERPOL assumes the legitimacy of the request unless there is a compelling reason to question it. This can result in injustices, as the accused may be pursued for political reasons rather than legitimate criminal activity. Bromund emphasizes the need for greater understanding of this presumption in the criminal justice system, urging attorneys and judges to recognize that INTERPOL is a message board for states, not a judicial body. Understanding this distinction is key to using INTERPOL appropriately and advocating for necessary reforms.

The Biden administration recently announced an extension of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for nearly 1 million immigrants from El Salvador, Sudan, Ukraine, and Venezuela, allowing them to renew their work permits and deportation protections. The decision will benefit roughly 234,000 Salvadorans, 1,900 Sudanese, 104,000 Ukrainians, and 600,000 Venezuelans. The TPS designation for El Salvador will last until March 2026, while those for Sudan, Ukraine, and Venezuela will extend through October 2026.

This move is significant, as it comes ahead of the incoming Trump administration, which has signaled plans to curtail or end TPS. Trump and Vice President-elect JD Vance have opposed the program, with some Republican lawmakers arguing it has been extended beyond its intended temporary nature. During Trump’s first term, efforts to end TPS were halted by legal challenges.

While the Biden administration extended TPS for these groups, it did not make new arrivals eligible for the status, despite calls from activists. For example, redesignating TPS for Venezuela would have made an additional 450,000 migrants eligible. Advocates have also pressured the administration to allow Nicaraguan immigrants to apply for TPS, but internal concerns suggest this may be avoided to prevent any appearance of political maneuvering before Trump's inauguration.

The affected populations vary in their legal circumstances, with Salvadorans generally having been in the U.S. since 2001, Ukrainians arriving after Russia's invasion in 2022, and many Venezuelans arriving due to the country’s ongoing crisis.

Kehoe’s executive orders will position Missouri ‘to assist with immigration enforcement when called upon by President Trump’s administration,’ said Attorney General Andrew Bailey

On Monday, Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe signed several executive orders aimed at tackling crime, a major focus of his gubernatorial campaign. These orders were introduced shortly after Kehoe took office and are part of a broader strategy to combat crime in the state, with more proposals set to be unveiled in his State of the State address on January 28.

The orders include the creation of regional task forces under "Operation Relentless Pursuit" to target individuals with outstanding warrants. Kehoe also established a “Blue Shield” community recognition program to reward cities and counties that enhance law enforcement efforts. Additionally, Missouri State Highway Patrol troopers will undergo federal immigration enforcement training through the 287-G program. This program, aimed at increasing immigration enforcement, is part of Missouri’s response to a promise from President Trump to intensify immigration crackdowns.

Kehoe’s orders also focus on improving the probation and parole system. A new working group will evaluate how to treat offenders with substance abuse issues while ensuring that violent criminals are incarcerated. With fentanyl overdose deaths and human trafficking concerns on the rise, Kehoe and Attorney General Andrew Bailey are seeking to address these challenges head-on, citing the link between these crimes and undocumented immigration.

Kehoe's crime-fighting plan aims to ensure that Missouri is equipped to combat crime through improved law enforcement and a more effective justice system, even in the face of federal immigration enforcement.

The return of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency could lead to significant changes in employment-based immigration policies, reflecting his “America First” agenda. This approach prioritizes American workers and national security, which could create new challenges for businesses seeking to recruit and retain international talent.

Key figures in Trump’s cabinet, such as Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, are expected to play pivotal roles in shaping these policies. Sessions, known for his strict stance on immigration, may advocate for policies that limit foreign workers’ access to the U.S. job market, particularly in high-skilled sectors like technology. Nielsen, with her background in national security, could push for more stringent vetting processes for foreign workers, potentially hindering the flow of talent.

Anticipated reforms include stricter visa requirements, increased scrutiny of foreign workers, and possibly the rollback of programs like H-1B visas, which are commonly used by tech companies to employ foreign professionals. These changes could have wide-reaching implications, from limiting the availability of skilled workers to creating more red tape for businesses to navigate when hiring internationally.

Recent data shows that foreign workers contribute significantly to industries such as technology, healthcare, and engineering, and any reduction in their availability could hinder U.S. economic growth. As businesses brace for potential shifts in immigration policy, understanding these dynamics will be crucial for adapting recruitment strategies and ensuring a continued supply of international talent.

A GOP bill, the Laken Riley Act, has passed the House and is gaining traction in the Senate with bipartisan support, aiming to expand the power of anti-immigrant state officials and federal judges in immigration enforcement. The bill seeks to overturn Supreme Court precedents, enabling states like Texas to bring immigration lawsuits against the federal government, a move previously blocked by courts.

Under the proposed law, state attorneys general would be empowered to sue the federal government over the release of individual immigrants from detention and even impose sanctions on foreign countries refusing to accept deported nationals. While the bill has cleared its first procedural hurdle in the Senate, it has sparked controversy among some Democrats who oppose granting states such broad authority to intervene in immigration law enforcement.

Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy expressed concerns about the bill allowing immigration decisions to be litigated across district courts nationwide. The bill's critics argue it could lead to fragmented, inconsistent enforcement and potentially destabilize U.S. foreign relations by allowing states to impose sanctions on other nations.

Defenders of the bill contend that it is necessary due to previous administrations’ failure to fully implement immigration laws and take action on crimes committed by migrants. The bill's passage would significantly alter the balance of power in immigration enforcement, shifting more control to state authorities while limiting the federal government’s discretion in releasing immigrants from detention.

Immigration plays a vital role in America’s economic success, yet our outdated system needs reform to ensure the country’s prosperity and security. As the economy recovers post-COVID-19, the demand for labor has surged, and immigrants have been essential in filling these roles. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts that increased immigration over the next decade will add $8.9 trillion to the GDP and reduce the deficit by nearly $1 trillion.

While immigration clearly benefits the economy, our legal immigration system is not built to support the modern economy. To maintain and expand this economic advantage, we need reforms that enable immigration to be maximized for the future of American prosperity.

In the 2024 election, the focus was on enforcement and removals, but there is a lack of discussion about the economic consequences of large-scale deportations. The U.S. must have a strategy in place to replace the workers who will inevitably be removed to avoid significant economic losses, estimated to be over $1 trillion in lost GDP.

The U.S. birth rate is below replacement levels, and by 2040, immigrants are projected to account for all U.S. population growth. Immigration is crucial to sustaining our labor force and population. Moreover, America’s security must encompass more than enforcement; we must continue offering freedom and opportunity to persecuted individuals globally by supporting refugee resettlement. Immigration is essential to the nation’s economic and demographic future.

Professor Ariana Mangual Figueroa's new book, Knowing Silence: How Children Talk about Immigration Status in School, has received widespread acclaim in the fields of anthropology and education, earning two prestigious awards. The book, which follows six Latina students navigating different immigration statuses as they transition from elementary to middle school in New York City, was honored with the 2024 Critics' Choice Book Award from the American Educational Studies Association and the 2024 Co-Outstanding Book Award from the Council on Anthropology and Education.

“I’m honored that Knowing Silence was selected for these two awards,” Mangual Figueroa said. “It’s humbling and affirming to know that scholars whose work I admire hold the book in such high regard.” The Council on Anthropology and Education praised the book for its emphasis on collaborative practices, highlighting the students’ voices as central to the narrative.

This is Mangual Figueroa’s first book, published by the University of Minnesota Press, and it is also available in an open-access format through Manifold, the press' partnership with the Graduate Center.

Since joining the Graduate Center faculty in 2019, Mangual Figueroa has led significant research partnerships, including the PIECE Research Project and the City University of New York Initiative on Immigration and Education. Her book, she notes, demonstrates the importance of listening to immigrant communities, whose members are experts and leaders in their own lives.

Border Patrol operations in Kern County this week have raised concerns among local residents, immigrant families, and the agricultural industry. According to immigration advocates, these operations have likely led to dozens of arrests, causing widespread alarm. The news quickly spread on TikTok and social media, with many warning others to avoid certain areas. The Bakersfield Police Department confirmed that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) had notified them about conducting operations within Bakersfield city limits and the broader Kern County area.

While the exact number of arrests is unclear, immigration advocates say that the operations have been unusually extensive compared to recent years. By Wednesday evening, there were reports of Border Patrol sightings in other parts of the Central Valley, including Sanger and along Interstate 5 near Los Banos. Local authorities, such as the Fresno County Sheriff's Department, stated they were not aware of the operations but noted that federal agents are not required to inform them.

Advocates working in Kern County are trying to understand the full scope of these actions. They are receiving numerous calls and messages from families searching for detained loved ones, with arrests reportedly occurring outside public places such as grocery stores, gas stations, and gyms. The United Farm Workers Foundation estimates that 192 individuals were detained in Kern County between Monday and Tuesday, and that number could rise. Advocates warn that these operations, which are targeting farmworkers, could be a scare tactic to intimidate immigrant communities.