Senate Pushes Ahead with $70 Billion More for ICE and CBP, Excluding Accountability Measures

This week, Congress moved closer to advancing legislation that would add about $70 billion in funding to immigration enforcement agencies through 2029, which is in addition to the $170 billion already provided last year. If enacted, the proposal would mark yet another circumvention of the regular government funding process—which requires bipartisan negotiations—to fund these agencies.

This funding is being pursued through the reconciliation process, which bypasses the 60-vote threshold needed in the Senate to overcome a filibuster. For the second time, congressional leaders aim to use reconciliation to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and its subagencies, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Since February 14, Democrats have refused to fund ICE and CBP unless meaningful reforms, including stronger warrant requirements and professional law enforcement standards, in an attempt to rein in aggressive conduct that has resulted in multiple deaths, including of U.S. citizens. Those efforts failed.

The result is a proposal that could fund ICE and CBP for years to come, with no meaningful congressional oversight. All of this funding would be available to the agencies through the end of fiscal year 2029.

What’s in the bill?

The proposal allocates $72 billion in new funding with nearly all of it going to immigration enforcement. It includes:

• ICE: $38.2 billion to expand and sustain enforcement operations by hiring and equipping personnel across its divisions, supporting detention and removal transportation, upgrading technology and facilities, and expanding 287(g) agreements with local law enforcement. $7.5 billion of this funding is specifically earmarked for ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations for “non-immigration” purposes.
• CBP: $26 billion to hire and equip personnel, upgrade surveillance and inspection technologies, conduct screenings of unaccompanied children, and support DHS’ border enforcement mission.
• DHS: $5 billion to fund several broad purposes, including those related to the Homeland Security and Judiciary portions of the reconciliation bill passed last year, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA). In OBBBA, DHS received a similar pot of money—often referred to as a “slush” fund given its broad purpose—of $10 billion. DHS has used those funds in legally suspect ways, including to cover DHS employees’ salaries during the government shutdown.
• Department of Justice (DOJ): $1.5 billion for a variety of purposes, including enforcing and administering federal immigration laws under the DOJ’s authority.

How does this compare to previous ICE and CBP budgets?

ICE and CBP are already among the most highly-funded law enforcement agencies in the federal government. In recent years, Congress has increased funding to both agencies through its annual appropriations process at the expense of agencies that process immigration benefits. Nevertheless, this proposal, especially combined with last year’s reconciliation bill, represents a historically high increase in immigration enforcement funding.

The proposal is nearly four times ICE’s annual budget from FY 2025. Combined with the $75 billion ICE already received last year through OBBBA, the agency will have received over eleven times its 2025 budget. While the funds can be used through 2029, the Congressional Budget Office notes that there is considerable uncertainty over the pace of spending given the lack of guardrails on when the money can be spent. 

This is a big concern, as ICE received $45 billion for detention through OBBBA to be used through 2029 but instead decided to use the overwhelming majority ($38 billion) of it immediately to convert warehouses into immigration detention centers. At a recent conference in Arizona, a DHS official in charge of spending funding from OBBBA said that the agency was on track to “obligate 75% of the funds” by the end of September this year.

Similarly, CBP, which would receive funding for its border operations in this proposal, would receive 3.5 times its 2025 budget. Again, this funding is available until 2029, but there are no proposed constraints on it being used sooner.

In addition, DHS would receive $5 billion beyond its annually appropriated amount to fund broad categories of priorities, including immigration-related provisions of last year’s OBBBA. The administration has so far been able to rely on its own interpretations when deciding how to use similar funds provided under the OBBBA.

What makes this particularly concerning is not just the amount—but the structure. By using the reconciliation process, Congress would effectively provide multi-year, lump-sum funding with fewer mechanisms for oversight or course correction. In contrast, the annual appropriations process allows lawmakers to revisit funding levels each year, adjust priorities, and impose conditions on how funds are spent.

What’s being foregone to fund immigration enforcement at these levels?

The tradeoffs here are significant. By channeling such a large share of federal resources into immigration enforcement—through a process that minimizes oversight—congressional leaders are also choosing not to invest those funds elsewhere.

In April, the Trump administration submitted its funding priorities for FY 2027. While lawmakers are considering giving billions more to ICE and CBP, the White House has proposed massive cuts to essential domestic programs. $70 billion could instead fund:

• Biomedical research for 4 years
• Student higher education grants for 5 years
• Energy assistance for low-income households (LIHEAP) for 6 years.
• Job Corps, a workforce development program, for 14 years
• Pre-school development grants for 73 years
• Rural health programs for 242 years

Instead, taxpayer dollars are being directed away from helping people meet basic needs and toward further expanding immigration enforcement infrastructure.

What does this mean for the future of immigration enforcement funding?

This isn’t just a debate about funding levels—it’s a debate about Congress’ priorities. Reconciliation was never designed to serve as the primary vehicle for shaping complex, long-term policy in areas like immigration enforcement. Unlike the traditional government funding process, reconciliation lacks many of the guardrails that require agencies to report their activity, provide members of Congress access to detention facilities, or operate certain programs.

Should Congress commit $70 billion to expand federal enforcement capacity with fewer checks, fewer reporting requirements, and less flexibility to respond to changing conditions? That’s the choice this bill presents.

The Senate is expected to vote on the bill during the third week of May.

The post Senate Pushes Ahead with $70 Billion More for ICE and CBP, Excluding Accountability Measures appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/91VPLm7
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

Data: Eligible Immigrant Voters Play a Key Role in Elections in Hundreds of Swing Districts

Analysis of 284 congressional districts highlights immigrants’ role in shaping close races 

April 16, Washington DC — A new analysis from the American Immigration Council finds that millions of immigrant voters who are U.S. citizens are a central part of the electorate across 284 congressional districts where elections will take place this year. 

The analysis on voting data reflects eligible and registered voters only. Under federal law, only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections. 

Drawing on the latest available data from the 2024 American Community Survey, the analysis shows that immigrants account for nearly one in five residents across the districts studied. They play a significant role in the workforce, tax base, and local economies that shape voters’ priorities. 

Key findings include:  

• U.S. citizens who are immigrants are poised to play a key role in close elections. There are an estimated 16 million registered immigrant voters (that is, naturalized U.S. citizens eligible and registered to vote) across the districts analyzed. In 44 percent of these districts (126 of 284), the number of eligible immigrant voters exceeds the margin of victory in the 2024 elections. 

• For example, in Florida’s 25th congressional district there are an estimated 135,500 immigrant voters. The district flipped from GOP to Democratic control in 2022 and the Democrats won again in 2024 by a narrow margin of victory of 30,700 votes. 

• In New Jersey’s 9th district, Democrats won by just over 12,600 votes in 2024. There are nearly 165,000 immigrants there who are U.S. citizens age 18 and above and thus eligible to vote.   

• Language and outreach matter. On average, 83.1 percent of immigrants speak a language other than English at home, highlighting the importance of outreach that reflects the diversity of communities in these districts. 

• Immigrants are a major part of local communities. On average, immigrants make up nearly 20 percent of residents across the 284 districts analyzed, and in some districts, they represent more than half of the population. 

“Immigrant voters who are U.S. citizens are a meaningful part of the electorate in many communities, especially in close races,” said Nan Wu, director of research at the American Immigration Council. “Like other voters, they care about jobs, housing, and the economy, and they are deeply embedded in the communities they help sustain.” 

The analysis also underscores that immigrants’ influence extends beyond elections. Across the districts studied, immigrants help drive economic growth, support key industries, and shape the issues that dominate elections, from inflation and housing to workforce shortages. 

Taken together, the findings show that immigrants are not a niche population, but a core part of the communities, economies, and electorate that define many congressional districts.

The post Data: Eligible Immigrant Voters Play a Key Role in Elections in Hundreds of Swing Districts appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/26krpdj
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

New Report: Immigrants Power Ohio’s Workforce and Pay Billions in Taxes

Immigrants in Ohio earned $27.3 billion in income and paid $7.3 billion in local, state, and federal taxes in 2023

Ohio, April 9, 2026 – New research from the American Immigration Council underscores the crucial role that immigrants play in Ohio’s economy, filling jobs in critical industries, strengthening the workforce, and contributing billions in taxes each year. The new report was prepared in partnership with Ohio Business for Immigration Solutions — a statewide business coalition powered by the American Immigration Council with over 100 members.  

“Immigrants are essential to Ohio’s future, powering the state’s workforce, strengthening critical industries, and paying billions in taxes that communities depend on every day,” said Rich André, Director of State and Local Initiatives at the American Immigration Council.  

“Ohio’s workforce shortages are placing real strain on businesses across the state, and as this new report highlights, immigrants play a vital role in driving economic growth and sustaining Ohio’s future,” said Jaclyn Ringstmeier, Executive Director of the Greater Medina Chamber of Commerce. 

Key findings: 

• Immigrants are helping fill Ohio’s workplace shortages and will help meet future needs. From 2019 to 2024, the number of overall online job postings increased by 8.2 percent. In 2023, 75.5 percent of immigrants were active in the labor force. That same year, immigrants were 29.4 percent more likely to be of working age than their U.S.-born counterparts – demonstrating that immigrants are already meeting a growing demand for workers and are poised to continue to be active contributors to the workforce. 

• Immigrants in Ohio contributed billions in taxes and consumer spending. In 2023, immigrants earned $27.3 billion in income and paid $7.3 billion in taxes, leaving $20 billion in spending power that supports local businesses and communities. That spending by immigrant households helps fuel growth and keeps local economic corridors vibrant. 

• Immigrants are uniquely positioned to meet critical multilingual needs in the workforce. From 2019 to 2024, the number of online job postings that required or prioritized bilingual skills in Ohio increased by 39.2 percent. Immigrants often have multilingual skills, enabling them to fill those positions. 

• Ohio is underutilizing its immigrant talent. Many immigrants with specialized training and skills gained abroad are unable to work in their fields, due to barriers like relicensing and language proficiency. As a result, in 2023, 43.7 percent of immigrants with a college education were working in jobs that did not require a college degree. 

Read the full factsheet to learn more about how immigrants are supporting Ohio’s workforce, tax base, and economic growth. 

### 

About the American Immigration Council 

The American Immigration Council works to create a more welcoming and fair immigration system. Through litigation, research, and programs that expand access to legal assistance, the Council helps ensure immigrants are embraced, communities are enriched, and justice prevails for all. Follow us on BlueSky @immcouncil.org and Instagram @immcouncil.    

About Ohio Business for Immigration Solutions 

Ohio Business for Immigration Solutions (OBIS) is a coalition of more than 100 Ohio businesses, trade associations, chambers of commerce, and economic development groups that believe modernizing our immigration system is critically important for the growth of the state’s economy. With its launch on December 10, 2020, the coalition released the Ohio Compact on Immigration, a set of principles developed to elevate the Ohio business community’s desire to promote immigration reforms that will strengthen the economy, attract and retain global talent, and bring new businesses to the Buckeye state. OBIS supports sensible public policy solutions that rise above partisanship and rhetoric and meet the challenges of the current immigration system while recognizing the valuable contributions immigrants make to the state.   

The post New Report: Immigrants Power Ohio’s Workforce and Pay Billions in Taxes appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/nIyBHV9
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

Supreme Court Today: Immigration Advocates Tell Justices Trump’s Turnback Policy Violated Law

Thousands denied right to seek asylum and forced back into danger; case has implications for refugee rights

March 24, 2026, Washington, D.C. – Immigration advocates argued today before the Supreme Court that the Trump administration’s turnback policy violated federal immigration law. Under the now-defunct policy, immigration officers at official border crossings physically and indefinitely blocked people seeking safety from setting foot on U.S. soil, flouting their legal responsibility to inspect and process those requesting asylum. 

“For more than 45 years, Congress has guaranteed people arriving at our borders the right to seek asylum, consistent with our international treaty obligations,” said Kelsi Corkran, Supreme Court Director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection, who argued the case. “Yet this Administration believes that Congress gave it discretion to completely ignore those requirements, and turn back those who are seeking refuge from persecution at its whim. Nothing in the law supports that result.”  

The turnback policy, euphemistically dubbed “metering” by government officials, broke with longstanding practice and violated the law. It denied thousands the right to seek asylum, forcing them to languish in hazardous conditions in Mexico or return to the peril they had fled.

In 2017, Al Otro Lado, a binational organization that provides free legal and humanitarian aid to immigrants, and a group of asylum seekers brought a class action suit challenging the policy, which the courts ruled unlawful in both 2022 and 2024. Although the turnback policy has not been in effect since 2021, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to overturn the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision declaring the policy unlawful.

“The right to seek asylum is not a policy preference or a loophole— it is a promise to human beings in their most desperate hour, a promise forged after the world witnessed the horrors of the Holocaust and said ‘never again’. Seeking asylum is not like taking a number at a deli counter and waiting for your turn,” said Nicole Elizabeth Ramos, Border Rights Project Director at Al Otro Lado, plaintiff in the case. “The people turned away at our border are fleeing rape, torture, kidnapping, and death threats. You cannot tell families running for their lives to go back and wait in danger because their suffering is inconvenient. We brought this case because the United States made a legal and moral commitment to protect people fleeing persecution. The question before the Court is whether that promise still means something — or whether it can be discarded when it becomes politically uncomfortable.”

For over a century, under our immigration laws, government officials have been required to inspect people seeking asylum who present themselves at designated ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border – as they must inspect all noncitizens seeking admission to the United States. This requirement ensures that the U.S. government does not send vulnerable people back to danger without giving them an opportunity to seek protection.

“The government’s turnback policy ran roughshod over our laws and treaty obligations. It fueled chaos and dysfunction at the southern border. And it was a complete humanitarian catastrophe, returning thousands of vulnerable refugees to grave harm,” said Melissa Crow, Director of Litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS). “For far too many, the turnback policy was a death sentence.We are here at the Supreme Court today for them, and for all people who continue to look to the United States as a beacon of hope, as a place where the persecuted may find safe haven. We will never stop fighting for the rights of people seeking safety at our nation’s doorstep.”

“We hope the Court rejects the administration’s cynical attempt to manipulate the meaning of the border to evade the most fundamental protections of international law and to continue to exile vulnerable asylum seekers,” said Baher Azmy, Legal Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “Our humanitarian treaty obligations, forged out of the horrors of WWII, are too important to suffer from the whims of CBP.”

“President Trump’s effort to abandon asylum seekers fleeing dangerous circumstances in fear for their lives is an unlawful overreach that imperils thousands of people – including children – in dire circumstances,” said Skye Perryman, President and CEO of Democracy Forward. “Democracy Forward is proud to work with these brave plaintiffs and our partners to protect the rights of people seeking asylum.”

“The Trump administration’s illegal turnback policy has flouted both U.S. and international law, all while creating massive dysfunction at our southern border,” said Rebecca Cassler, Senior Litigation Attorney at the American Immigration Council. “But most importantly, we cannot forget the people at the heart of this case — the hundreds of thousands of vulnerable asylum seekers who were sent back to danger, and in some cases, death. They deserve justice most of all.” 

For a recording of the press conference on the steps of the Supreme Court following arguments, see here.

For a recording of the interfaith vigil held outside the Court earlier this morning, see here.

For more about the case, see the campaign website, No Turning Back.

###

Al Otro Lado provides holistic legal and humanitarian support to refugees, deportees, and other migrants in the U.S. and Tijuana through a multidisciplinary, client-centered, harm reduction-based practice.  They engage in individual representation, human rights monitoring, medical-legal partnerships, and impact litigation to protect the rights of immigrants and people seeking asylum.

The American Immigration Council works to strengthen America by shaping how America thinks about and acts towards immigrants and immigration and by working toward a more fair and just immigration system that opens its doors to those in need of protection and unleashes the energy and skills that immigrants bring. The Council brings together problem solvers and employs four coordinated approaches to advance change—litigation, research, legislative and administrative advocacy, and communications.

The Center for Gender & Refugee Studies defends the human rights of courageous refugees seeking asylum in the United States. With strategic focus and unparalleled legal expertise, CGRS champions the most challenging cases, fights for due process, and promotes policies that deliver safety and justice for refugees.

The Center for Constitutional Rights works with communities under threat to fight for justice and liberation through litigation, advocacy, and strategic communications. Since 1966, the Center for Constitutional Rights has taken on oppressive systems of power, including structural racism, gender oppression, economic inequity, and governmental overreach. 

The Democracy Forward Foundation is a national legal organization that advances democracy and social progress through litigation, policy, public education, and regulatory engagement. 

The Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection is a non-partisan, public interest organization within Georgetown Law. ICAP engages in litigation, policy, and public education to defend constitutional rights and protect our democratic processes.

The post Supreme Court Today: Immigration Advocates Tell Justices Trump’s Turnback Policy Violated Law appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/kxIfC83
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

Federal Court Blocks Significant Pieces of Administration’s Sweeping Immigration Appeals Rule That Eliminates Meaningful Judicial Review

Order Halts Implementation of Dangerous Steps that Would Have Dismantled Safeguards at the Board of Immigration Appeals

Washington, D.C. — The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued an order late last night in Amica Center for Immigrant Rights et al. v. Executive Office for Immigration Review et al., blocking significant pieces of the Trump-Vance administration’s new policy that sought to eliminate meaningful appellate review before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). 

Plaintiffs in the case include Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, Brooklyn Defender Services, Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project, HIAS, and National Immigrant Justice Center. Democracy Forward, the American Immigration Council, and National Immigrant Justice Center represent the plaintiffs.

The lawsuit and motion for preliminary relief challenge the February 6, 2026, Interim Final Rule (IFR), “Appellate Procedures for the Board of Immigration Appeals,” which was set to take effect today, March 9, 2026. The IFR would have imposed sweeping changes that would have eviscerated noncitizens’ right to appeal decisions in their immigration cases that have now been blocked, including:

• Reduce the time to file most appeals from 30 days to 10 days;
• Require summary dismissal of appeals unless a majority of permanent BIA members vote within 10 days to accept the case for review; and
• Permit dismissal decisions before transcripts are created or records are transmitted.

“At a time when the due process rights of immigrants are under attack, this ruling prevents the BIA from reaching the point of near self-destruction,” said Emilie Raber, Senior Attorney at the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights. “We hope that this decision is the first step of many steps in ensuring that immigration courts reach decisions based on the law rather than on pre-determined outcomes.”

 “Today’s ruling preserves a vital avenue for judicial review in removal proceedings,” said Lucas Marquez, Director of Civil Rights & Law Reform at Brooklyn Defender Services, “And reminds government agencies to follow proper procedures when attempting to make sweeping changes to regulations.  

“This ruling keeps in place a basic, yet critical, protection for immigrants facing removal: the ability to appeal their case,” said Laura St. John, Legal Director at the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project. “As the administration continues to try to deport as many people as they can quickly and often without a fair day in court, it is critical for everyone to have the opportunity to file an appeal. Without this decision, countless immigrants with valid claims would have been hurriedly deported to dangerous conditions, forsaking due process for efficiency.” 

“Today, the court has again held the federal government to its foundational responsibility to afford basic fairness and due process to all whose rights it seeks to curtail,” said Stephen Brown, Director of Immigration Legal Services at HIAS. “We are grateful to our counsel in this case, and proud to stand with our co-plaintiffs to work for a fair immigration system.”

“Today’s ruling is an important win in the face of an administration that is intent on dismantling our immigration system at any cost, including betraying our country’s shared values of the importance of due process and access to counsel,” said Mary Georgevich, Senior Litigation Attorney at the National Immigrant Justice Center. “While imperfect, the Board of Immigration Appeals is the body that Congress has mandated to review deportation orders when the immigration courts get it wrong. Allowing the Trump administration’s reckless proposal to block immigrants from a fair opportunity for review of bad decisions would have resulted in people being returned to danger and families unjustly separated, all to serve a racist mass deportation agenda. We are grateful the court seemed to see this proposed rule for what it was and is ruling to uphold both due process and rule of law.” 

“Today’s decision makes it clear that the Trump-Vance administration cannot play games with the immigration appeals system to eliminate basic due process and fast-track deportations,” said Erez Reuveni, Senior Counsel at Democracy Forward, who presented the oral argument. “Once again, no matter how hard this administration tries to hide its cruel and unlawful actions behind an ‘immigration policy,’ a federal court has made clear that the government must follow the law and cannot strip people of their basic rights. This is another demonstration that litigation is powerful. We will continue representing our plaintiffs in court to defend their rights and hold this administration accountable.”

“This order protects a critical safeguard in our immigration system: the ability to appeal a court decision,” said Suchita Mathur, Senior Litigation Attorney at the American Immigration Council. “This rule would have led to the rushed deportations of untold people before their cases could even be properly reviewed. Today’s decision helps protect basic fairness in our immigration courts.”

The IFR was issued without the required notice-and-comment rulemaking period and fundamentally restructures appellate review in removal proceedings. By requiring summary dismissal unless the full Board acts within 10 days — before transcripts are created — the rule makes meaningful review functionally impossible in most cases.

The legal team at Democracy Forward includes Erez Reuveni, Allyson Scher, Catherine Carroll, and Robin Thurston. Counsel at American Immigration Council include Michelle Lapointe and Suchi Mathur.

Read the opinion here and the order here.

The post Federal Court Blocks Significant Pieces of Administration’s Sweeping Immigration Appeals Rule That Eliminates Meaningful Judicial Review appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/ewy4Omg
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

Legal Groups Sue to Block Rule Gutting Immigration Appeals

Emergency Filing Seeks Court Order to Halt Implementation of Interim Final Rule that Dismantles Safeguards at the Board of Immigration Appeals

Washington, D.C., Feb. 26, 2026 — The American Immigration Council and a coalition of other legal groups, including the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, Brooklyn Defender Services, Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project, HIAS, and National Immigrant Justice Center, filed a lawsuit and emergency motion today to block a new interim final rule issued by the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) that would effectively eliminate meaningful appellate review before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenges the February 6, 2026, Interim Final Rule (IFR) titled Appellate Procedures for the Board of Immigration Appeals, which is set to take effect on March 9, 2026.

As detailed in the complaint, the IFR imposes sweeping changes that would eviscerate noncitizens’ right to appeal decisions in their immigration cases, including:

• Reduce the time to file most appeals from 30 days to 10 days;
• Require summary dismissal of appeals unless a majority of permanent BIA members vote within 10 days to accept the case for review;
• Permit dismissal decisions before transcripts are created or records are transmitted;
• Impose simultaneous 20-day briefing schedules with extensions allowed only in narrow “exceptional circumstances”;
• Eliminate reply briefs unless specifically invited; and
• Impose rigid case completion deadlines and concentrate decision-making authority in agency leadership.

“The BIA Interim Final Rule makes a mockery of due process. In addition to taking away virtually any benefit the BIA could provide immigrants, it will wreak havoc on people with cases in immigration court or federal appellate courts,” said Emilie Raber, Senior Attorney at the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights. “Litigants who are children, are detained, do not have a lawyer, have disabilities, or speak rare languages will be disproportionately harmed by this Interim Final Rule.”

“The Interim Final Rule creates a barrier to appellate review in removal proceedings and strikes at the heart of due process,” said Lucas Marquez, Director of Civil Rights & Law Reform at Brooklyn Defender Services. “The Rule will result in the deportation of people who are eligible for immigration relief — people who have valid legal claims that an immigration judge got it wrong — simply because the Board of Immigration Appeals will no longer be an avenue to fairly review their cases.”

“This interim final rule completely decimates the process to appeal a case in front of the BIA,” said Laura St. John, Legal Director at the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project. “It will render the vast majority of immigrants unable to appeal their cases and will be particularly harmful to those who most need the recourse of an appeal process, including pro se litigants, vulnerable children, Indigenous language speakers, and people in immigration detention. It will be nearly impossible for most detained pro se individuals to submit a notice of appeal in just 10 days, and without the ability to appeal, many people will be unjustly deported back to dangerous or even life-threatening conditions.” 

“Our clients deserve a fair chance in the immigration court system,” said Stephen Brown, Director of Immigration Legal Services at HIAS.  “Without access to a meaningful appeal process, people who have fled persecution and violence could face dangerous consequences, including the risk of being sent back to a place that is not safe for them.  We are proud to join this legal challenge, and to take a stand against a policy change that will have seismic impact on the ability of legal service providers such as HIAS to support immigrants in navigating a complex and ever-changing legal system.

““It is hard to overstate the potential human toll of the changes proposed in this rule,” said Lisa Koop, director of legal services at the National Immigrant Justice Center, which is co-counsel and an organizational plaintiff in the lawsuit. “Curtailing due process in this manner guarantees that legal services providers like ours will be less able to help our clients defend against unjust deportation, and many people who would otherwise be eligible for asylum or other legal status in the United States will never have the opportunity to pursue protection under our laws.”

According to the filings, the IFR was issued without the required notice-and-comment rulemaking period and fundamentally restructures appellate review in removal proceedings. Plaintiffs argue that by requiring summary dismissal unless the full Board acts within 10 days — before transcripts are created — the rule makes meaningful review functionally impossible in most cases.

Plaintiffs argue the rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Fifth Amendment, which protects people from deprivation of liberty without due process of law. They are asking the court to block the rule’s effective date and prevent implementation while the case proceeds.

The organizations are seeking a preliminary relief to prevent the rule from taking effect on March 9, 2026, and to keep it blocked while the litigation proceeds.

The case is Amica Center for Immigrant Rights v. EOIR.

View the complaint here.

View the stay motion here.

The post Legal Groups Sue to Block Rule Gutting Immigration Appeals appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/WQ5RZrb
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

Report: Immigration Detention Is Bigger, Harsher, and Less Accountable Than Ever

Trump Administration Targets People with No Criminal Record and Uses Detention to Pressure Them to Give Up Their Cases 

Washington DC, Jan. 14 Wednesday — A new report released today by the American Immigration Council shows that the Trump administration is locking up hundreds of thousands of people— most with no criminal record—into a harsh immigration detention system that makes it near impossible to fight their cases or secure release.  

READ THE REPORT HERE.

The report, Immigration Detention Expansion in Trump’s Second Term, reveals how historic funding increases and aggressive enforcement tactics have pushed immigration detention to the highest level in U.S. history. Rather than addressing serious public safety threats, the government is spending billions on mass detention to pressure people who pose no threat to give up their cases and accept deportation. 

As the Trump administration expands its mass deportation agenda, the consequences extend far beyond detention centers. DHS’s aggressive tactics during large-scale enforcement actions in American neighborhoods around the country have already led to tragic, preventable deaths, revealing the human cost of an immigration enforcement system that operates with little oversight or accountability. 

“This has absolutely nothing to do with law and order. Under mass deportation, we’re seeing the construction of a mass immigration detention system on a scale the United States has never seen, in which people with no criminal record are routinely locked up with no clear path to release,” said Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council. “Over the next three years, billions of more dollars will be poured into a detention system that is on track to rival the entire federal criminal prison system. The goal is not public safety, but to pressure people into giving up their rights and accepting deportation.” 

READ THE REPORT HERE.

According to the report, the number of people held in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention rose nearly 75 percent in 2025, climbing from roughly 40,000 at the start of the year to 66,000 by the start of December, the highest level ever recorded. And with Congress authorizing $45 billion dollars in new detention funding, the report warns that the system could more than triple in size over the next four years. 

Major findings of the report include: 

• There is a dramatic shift in who is being detained. Arrests of people with no criminal record surged by 2,450 percent in Trump’s first year, driven by increases in tactics like “at-large” arrests, roving patrols, worksite raids, and re-arrests of people attending immigration court hearings or ICE check-ins. The percent of people arrested by ICE and held in detention with no criminal record rose from 6 percent in January to 41 percent by December. 

• The detention system has expanded so rapidly that already deleterious conditions have worsened. Through the start of December, ICE was using over 100 more facilities to detain immigrants than at the start of the year. For the first time ever, thousands of immigrants arrested in the interior are being detained in hastily-constructed tent camps, where conditions are brutal. More people died in ICE detention in 2025 than in the last four years combined. 

• People are stripped of their chance to ask a judge for release. New policies have made prolonged, indefinite detention the norm. The Trump administration is pursuing policies that strip millions of people, if they are detained, of the right to have a bond hearing where they can make a case to be released into their community while their immigration case is under review, including for those with decades of life in the United States.  

• The administration is using detention to drive up deportations. By November 2025, for every person released from ICE detention, more than fourteen were deported directly from custody. This is compared to an approximate one-to-two ratio from a year earlier.   

• As the administration expands detention, it is simultaneously gutting oversight. The rapid growth of detention has been paired with deep cuts to internal watchdogs and new restrictions on congressional inspections. This erosion of oversight has consequences that extend beyond detention facilities themselves: as ICE is operating with fewer checks on its authority, aggressive interior enforcement in cities has led to preventable harm and deaths, underscoring how a lack of accountability is putting lives at risk.  

“The Trump administration continues to falsely claim it’s going after the ‘worst of the worst,’ but public safety is just a pretext for locking up immigrants and pushing them to abdicate their cases.,” said Nayna Gupta, policy director at the American Immigration Council. “Horrific conditions inside detention facilities break people into accepting deportation which fuels the administration’s inhumane deportation quotas and goals.” 

The report profiles three people whose experiences illustrate the real-world impact of this historic expansion of detention: 

• A green card holder and father of two, detained by ICE at an airport because of a past conviction he was told would not jeopardize his legal status. ICE then neglected his medical issues for months while he was detained. 

• An asylum seeker who was granted humanitarian protection by an immigration judge, yet remains detained months later, without explanation, as ICE seeks to deport her to a third country, and who says she was treated better in federal prison when serving time for an immigration offense.  

• A DACA recipient, detained following a criminal arrest, who was transferred repeatedly across the country as ICE searched for available bed space and witnessed consistently poor conditions across multiple different detention centers. 

With billions of additional dollars already approved, the report warns that immigration detention is poised to grow even larger, deepening the human, legal, and financial costs for families, communities, and the country as a whole. 

“This is a system built to produce deportations, not justice,” said Reichlin-Melnick. “When detention becomes the default response to immigration cases, the costs are borne by everyone. Families are torn apart, due process is set aside, and billions of taxpayer dollars are wasted on these unnecessary and cruel policies that do nothing to increase public safety.”

The post Report: Immigration Detention Is Bigger, Harsher, and Less Accountable Than Ever  appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/zKdeWlT
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

Can Renee Good’s Family Sue ICE in the Aftermath of Her Killing? The Answer Is Complicated

On the snowy streets of Minneapolis in the early days of January 2026, an ICE officer shot and killed 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good—a U.S. citizen and mother driving a Honda Pilot with stuffed animals hanging out of the glove compartment. She had reportedly just dropped off her six-year-old child at school. Multiple bystander videos captured the shooting and the distressing aftermath, which included ICE agents preventing a doctor from reaching Good. These images compound what the U.S. has experienced since the start of the second Trump administration – social media feeds filled with videos of ICE and Border Patrol agents smashing car windows during enforcement and firing pepper spray projectiles and tear gas canisters at those who showed up to witness the human toll of immigration enforcement in their communities.

In the wake of Good’s killing, many have naturally asked how her family might hold the individual officer or federal government accountable for her death. The answer is complicated, and any legal fight is riddled with pitfalls.

The well-known legal defense of qualified immunity shields law enforcement agents from having to defend against civil rights lawsuits for monetary compensation (called “damages”) unless the right was “clearly established” such that a “reasonable officer” would understand his conduct violated the law.

What is less well understood is that—thanks to the Supreme Court—there is virtually no way left to sue individual federal officers for monetary damages for violating individuals’ constitutional rights. Local and state law enforcement who violate people’s rights can be sued for under a Reconstruction-era law, 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. No similar statute exists for federal agents. Instead, the Supreme Court in 1971 ruled in a case called Bivens v. Six Unnamed Known Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics that an individual could sue federal drug agents for violating his Fourth Amendment rights in conducting an unlawful search and arrest.

But since that time—and especially under the Roberts Court—the Supreme Court has eviscerated Bivens. From Border Patrol agents fatally shooting a Mexican teenager across the U.S.-Mexico border to agents on the U.S.-Canada border allegedly throwing the owner of a bed and breakfast to the ground and later retaliating against him, the Supreme Court made clear that it will not allow suits against federal officers in any circumstances beyond the facts of Bivens itself and two (now very dated) additional cases. While the Court has not overruled Bivens, it has severely weakened its utility.

Vice President J.D. Vance wrongly claimed that the ICE officer who shot Renee Good is entitled to “absolute immunity.” That is patently incorrect—federal agents acting under color of law can potentially be prosecuted criminally for willfully depriving an individual of their civil rights. A state prosecution is also theoretically possible.

In addition, individuals can still sue the federal government under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for injuries committed at the hands of federal employees. Indeed, the federal government paid nearly $5 million to settle an FTCA case brought by the family of Ashli Babbitt, a woman killed by a Capitol Police officer on January 6, 2021 while storming the Capitol.

But the reality is that obtaining legal accountability for actions like the killing of Renee Good through civil lawsuits is challenging by design.

DHS agents have committed excessive force before this administration. During an ICE/IRS raid on a meatpacking plant in East Tennessee in 2018, surveillance video captured an ICE agent putting his boot on the neck of a worker who was lying face down on the floor for 25 seconds—a dangerous practice that could result in serious injury or death. That same agent was accused of punching a different worker in the face during the raid. The only reason the “boot to the neck” incident came to light at all was because of a civil lawsuit against the individual agents.

If courts rule that individuals cannot sue federal agents for rights violations or DHS agents successfully assert qualified immunity in such cases, such evidence may never be revealed. With the ubiquity of smartphone cameras and the growing brazenness of DHS’ violence on the streets of U.S. cities, growing public awareness of law enforcement abuse has the potential to lead to policy change. Efforts to enact federal statutes to codify Bivens have not progressed in Congress, but could gain momentum as people from across the ideological spectrum push back against federal law enforcement overreach.

No amount of money will bring back people killed by federal agents, but money damages are an important part of the U.S. legal system, promoting accountability and serving as a deterrent against future rights abuses. A right without a remedy is a hollow promise—all but ensuring that federal agents will continue to engage in actions that endanger and kill people.

Photo by Chad Davis

The post Can Renee Good’s Family Sue ICE in the Aftermath of Her Killing? The Answer Is Complicated appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/dnI4uDo
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

New Cohort Selected for the Gateways for Growth Challenge

Round VI of the Challenge Will Support Local Communities in Welcoming Immigrants

WASHINGTON DC & DECATUR, GA, December 15, 2025 — The American Immigration Council (the Council) and Welcoming America, two national nonprofits, are pleased to announce that over 10 local communities have been selected to receive Gateways for Growth Challenge (G4G) awards as part of Round VI of the initiative. Awardees will receive a mix of customized research, technical assistance, and planning support to develop strategies that ensure all residents — including immigrants — can succeed and fully contribute to their communities.

The 2026 awardees span both urban and rural communities across ten states and represent the broad range of welcoming work happening across the country led by local governments, nonprofits, chambers of commerce, and community coalitions. Some of these communities include:

• Arlington County, Virginia
• Charlotte, North Carolina
• Durham, North Carolina
• Fort Bend County, Texas
• Johnson County, Kansas
• Lancaster, Pennsylvania
• Las Cruces, New Mexico
• Mahoning County, Ohio
• St. Louis, Missouri
• Wabash County, Indiana

“For nearly a decade, the Gateways for Growth Challenge has helped local communities quantify the impact of their immigrant populations and invest in welcoming policies and programs. We are excited to work with the new cohort in creating opportunity for all residents,” said Rich André, Director of State and Local Initiatives at the American Immigration Council.

“This cohort represents local leaders who are doing the day-to-day work of making their communities places where everyone can participate and succeed,” said Molly Hilligoss, senior network director of Welcoming America. “We’re proud to support them as they turn their welcoming values into action.”

Since 2016, G4G has supported more than 75 localities across 37 states. Participating communities have developed welcoming plans that address language access, workforce development, civic participation, and social cohesion. Many have gone on to pass welcoming resolutions, launch new programs, join the broader Welcoming Network, and achieve Certified Welcoming status—a national recognition for communities that meet benchmarks for inclusion and welcoming. For more information about Gateways for Growth, visit gatewaysforgrowth.org.

###  

About the Gateways for Growth Challenge 

The Gateways for Growth Challenge (G4G) is a competitive opportunity for localities to receive research support and technical assistance from the American Immigration Council and Welcoming America to improve immigrant inclusion in their communities. Learn more atgatewaysforgrowth.org.   

About Welcoming America

Welcoming America is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that leads a movement of inclusive communities becoming more prosperous by ensuring everyone belongs. Through the Welcoming Network, we work to change systems and culture by providing communities with the roadmap they need to create welcoming policies and share new approaches to inclusion to create an environment where everyone can truly thrive. Learn more at www.welcomingamerica.org. 

About the American Immigration Council

The American Immigration Council works to strengthen America by shaping how America thinks about and acts towards immigrants and immigration and by working toward a more fair and just immigration system that opens its doors to those in need of protection and unleashes the energy and skills that immigrants bring. The Council brings together problem solvers and employs four coordinated approaches to advance change—litigation, research, legislative and administrative advocacy, and communications. Follow us on Bluesky @immcouncil.org and on Instagram @immcouncil.

The post New Cohort Selected for the Gateways for Growth Challenge  appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/QjYmDL8
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

Federal Court Blocks ICE’s Unlawful Detention of Immigrant Teens Turning 18

Washington, D.C., Dec. 12, 2025 — On December 12, a federal court in D.C. ordered U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to follow a long-standing court order that protects immigrant teens from being placed in adult detention centers. The court’s order blocks a new ICE policy to automatically shuttle unaccompanied children into adult detention once they turn 18.  

Read the court order here and the opinion here.

The order specifically covers children who originally entered the United States as unaccompanied minors and who “age out” of the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) (the federal program that looks after unaccompanied children by placing them in shelters and then later with family and/or guardians).  

This federal court decision enforces a 2021 permanent injunction in Garcia Ramirez v. ICE, which requires ICE to comply with their statutory obligations by considering the least restrictive setting available for every unaccompanied child who turns18 and to make all age-outs eligible for alternatives to detention. 

“This ruling makes clear that ICE cannot secretly flout the law or blatantly ignore court orders,” said Suchita Mathur, senior litigation attorney with the American Immigration Council. “ICE tried to detain newly-18-year-olds as a matter of course. These are kids that ICE officers have found, in almost all cases, do not pose a danger or flight risk, with sponsors, families, and community support waiting for them. This decision puts a stop to that.” 

Under a new policy published October 1, ICE told shelters and attorneys that all unaccompanied children turning 18 would be transferred to adult detention, even when they had safe homes and sponsors waiting to receive them. Adult detention threatens the teenagers’ short- and long-term development. Currently, ICE is holding a record number of people in detention, fueling overcrowding and dehumanizing conditions like lack of adequate medical care, abusive treatment, and restricted access to legal and psychological help. The court found that automatically sending teens into adult detention, without considering safer, age-appropriate alternatives, is a violation of the law.  

“Today’s ruling sends a powerful message: ICE can’t put teenagers in dangerous, overcrowded facilities just because they turned 18,” said Mark Fleming, associate director of federal litigation at the National Immigrant Justice Center. “There are safer, lawful options that keep young people connected to school, family, and community. That’s what the law requires, and that’s what this order restores.” 

The court’s ruling requires ICE to immediately stop following its October 1 guidance and to remove anyone placed under detention as a result.

Read the court order here and the opinion here.

The post Federal Court Blocks ICE’s Unlawful Detention of Immigrant Teens Turning 18  appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/Z8NakKe
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

Supporting Working Families Through Flexible, Affordable Childcare

KidsPark is a national franchise that opened with a simple mission: to provide accessible, responsible hourly daycare for families who can’t—or don’t want to—use full-day childcare. Parents can drop off their kids anytime during operating hours for as little or as much time as they need. No reservations are required, and parents pay by the hour.

The model proved to be a success. Now, 37 years later, KidsPark is a national franchise, with daycare centers operating in nine states. Sisters Beth Christie and Heather Alanis jumped in 17 years ago, opening the first KidsPark center in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.¹

“We have families who use us five days a week. or parents who just drop in as needed,” said Beth.

KidsPark strives to support low- and middle-income parents, for whom standard childcare may be prohibitively expensive—potentially pushing them out of the workforce for years. Many parents manage to juggle conflicting work shifts to ensure one can always be with the kids. Even so, they still need affordable care during the overlap, when both are at work. “The hourly drop-off allows them to minimize their childcare costs,” said Beth.

Currently, parents pay $12 per hour for one child, and an additional $6 per hour for each sibling—less than many independent babysitters. “Having quality staff that can take good care of your children and keeping rates low for parents, it’s definitely a balancing act,” said Beth.

KidsPark typically hires young people, often college students. All the current teachers are in their 20s. The directors are in their 30s.

From the beginning, immigrants have been vital to the success of KidsPark Arlington. “We’ve always relied in the childcare industry on people who have come here from another country, or are first- or second-generation,” said Heather.

Often these young people are studying to become nurses or schoolteachers. Beth said, “It’s just fun to see caregiving as a personality type.”

“The young women who work for us tend to be very family oriented,” she said. “We have, over the years, hired cousins and sisters because we believe they work so well together, and all of them have come from immigrant families.”

Immigrants and children of immigrants also bring bilingual skills, which benefit children from all backgrounds, particularly in a diverse area like Dallas, where immigrant workers serve vital roles in construction, manufacturing, healthcare, and more.² “We want our staff to reflect our customers,” said Beth. “We’ve loved having teachers that are bilingual.”

“The teachers that have come from immigrant families have generally been the kindest, most diligent, hard workers,” said Beth. “I have found myself in awe of some of the young women who have come through the center, their work ethic. And they’ve brought so much love to the center.”

1. Beth Christie and Heather Alanis, interview with author, October 8, 2025. ↩︎
2. American Immigration Council, “Immigration in the Dallas–Fort Worth Area,” accessed November 11, 2025, https://ift.tt/M925okI. ↩︎

The post Supporting Working Families Through Flexible, Affordable Childcare appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/e1QpLMB
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

A Life Rebuilt Through Caregiving in Bentonville, Arkansas

It was Laura’s late husband who moved the family to the United States—to help his parents start a ministry in Bentonville, Arkansas. His parents were retired missionaries who had immigrated to the United States years earlier and were, by then, U.S. citizens.²⁴

“I didn’t want to come,” Laura said, but for three years her in-laws kept pushing. “They were insisting.”

Five years after Laura agreed to relocate, her husband was killed in an accident, leaving her with two children who had integrated into their new life in the United States. “I started doing any kind of job I could do because I needed to support myself,” she said. “I knew that not having a social security number I couldn’t apply anywhere.”

Unauthorized to work in the United States, Laura did what so many immigrant women in her situation do: she worked as a babysitter and nanny. There was always plenty of work, and she was, and still is, good at it, she said. “Every single day I show up.” When a family asked if she knew anyone who cleaned houses, she said, “I know no one, but I can do it.”

Laura spent 14 years taking care of other people’s children. Most of the parents, all U.S.-born, worked for Walmart, which has its headquarters in Bentonville.

Last year, when Laura became authorized to work in the United States, she took a full-time job at a friend’s office. But she still works part-time for the family she had been nannying for. “I take my lunchtime at 3:30 p.m., and I pick up the kids from school.” She remains in high demand for her childcare work. “A lot of families know me.”

Laura is grateful for the babysitting work, and to have been able to help these American families. “The family I worked for for many years, that family was a blessing,” she said. “They paid me very well. Every year they gave me a bonus. They valued my work.”

The post A Life Rebuilt Through Caregiving in Bentonville, Arkansas  appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/veT36go
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com

Immigrant Nannies Make Work Possible for a New York Family

Liz is a fourth-generation New Yorker who found her family’s first nanny through a neighborhood parent group, and their second—after a break during COVID-19 when they lived with her parents—through a nanny co-operative. Both nannies were immigrants, simply because, as Liz put it, “The bulk of nannies who are working in Brooklyn are immigrants.”⁵

“We decided to go with a nanny when my first son was very young because he had pretty serious food allergies, and managing his food was a pretty concerted effort,” she said. Both Liz and her husband work, and both would like to continue doing so.

Liz works in child welfare and philanthropy, helping families across the country care for their children. Her husband is a medical researcher, helping to develop next-generation gene therapies that are already saving lives.

“I like working. I want to be working. I think that the work I do is worth doing,” she said. “If I didn’t have somebody who I thought was safe and caring and aligned with my kids every day then I wouldn’t be working.”

The current nanny, Maria, has worked with the family for four years.⁶ She provides daytime care for their three children, ages 2 through 6, for 42 hours a week. She makes $36 per hour plus overtime, equating to about $80,000 per year.

It’s certainly a substantial sum, and Liz is grateful that she and her husband can afford it. But, said Liz, daycare is also expensive. Three-child families like Liz’s in New York City pay an annual average of $69,000 for daycare.⁷

“The nanny’s work makes all the other work happen. My kids adore her, fully and completely, and they’re legitimately obsessed with her kid,” who the nanny sometimes brings with her, Liz said. “These are essential and important and contributing members to our society and economy.”

Interacting with the nanny gives the children exposure to another culture—over and above the occasional informal Spanish lesson. “We live in a diverse city, and I want my kids to know a variety of people from a variety of places, and to value people from different backgrounds,” Liz said. The family can trust that Maria will devote the personalized attention their children need: “My son with anaphylactic allergies has never had a reaction with her. And I can’t say the same for me.”

The post Immigrant Nannies Make Work Possible for a New York Family  appeared first on American Immigration Council.

from American Immigration Council https://ift.tt/UExTkjX
via Dear ImmigrantDear Immigrant

◆ YEAR IN KENYA SERIES

This essay is part of the Year in Kenya series — twelve months in Nairobi, April 2025 to April 2026.

The analytical home for the series is gabrielmahia.com, where Gabriel writes on power, institutions, and what holds under pressure. The full reading order — 34 essays across 5 properties — is at the Year in Kenya series page.

Read the Series →gabrielmahia.com