Upworthy's book GOOD PEOPLE, now available - take a look!

Shop
 Explore 

asylum

Wellness

Respected U.S. diplomat resigns over 'inhumane' treatment of Haitians with scathing letter

Yamiche Alcindor/Twitter, U.S. Department of State

It takes a lot to push a career diplomat to quit their job. A diplomat's specialty, after all, is diplomacy—managing relationships between people and governments, usually with negotiation and compromise.

So when the U.S. special envoy to Haiti, whose "diplomatic experience and demonstrated interagency leadership have been honed directing several of the United States government's largest overseas programs in some of the world's most challenging, high-threat environments," decides to resign effective immediately, it means something.

Daniel Foote, who was appointed special envoy to Haiti in July of this year, explained his decision to quit in a strongly-worded letter to Secretary of State Blinken. His resignation comes in the wake of a wave of Haitian migrants arriving at the southern U.S. border and widespread reports of harsh treatment and deportations.

SCOOP: Special Envoy for Haiti, Amb Daniel Foote, a career member of foreign service, has RESIGNED. In his letter of resignation, he says he will not be associated with the U.S.'s "inhumane, counterproductive decision to deport thousands of Haitian refugees." Letter attached.pic.twitter.com/KlW5GoTF3u
— Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche Alcindor) 1632397337

"I will not be associated with the United States inhumane, counterproductive decision to deport thousands of Haitian refugees and illegal immigrants to Haiti, a country where American officials are confined to secure compounds because of the danger posed by armed gangs in control of daily life," he wrote. "Our policy approach to Haiti remains deeply flawed, and my recommendations have been ignored and dismissed, when not edited to project a narrative different from my own."

Foote went on to describe the dire conditions in Haiti:

"The people of Haiti, mired in poverty, hostage to the terror, kidnappings, robberies, and massacres of armed gang alliances, simply cannot support the forced infusion of thousands of returned migrants lacking food, shelter, and money without additional, avoidable human tragedy. The collapsed state is unable to provide security or basic services, and more refugees will fuel further desperation and crime. Surging migration to our borders will only grow as we add to Haiti's unacceptable misery."

What Haiti needs, Foote wrote, is "immediate assistance" to restore order so they can hold an election for their next president and parliament, as well as humanitarian assistance.

"But what our Haitian friends really want, and need," he wrote, "is the opportunity to chart their own course, without international puppeteering and favored candidates but with genuine support for that course. I do not believe that Haiti can enjoy stability until her citizens have the dignity of truly choosing their own leaders fairly and acceptably."

Finally, he chastised the U.S. and other nations for continuing to intervene in Haiti's politics, pointing out that such policies have never gone well and will only make problems worse:

"Last week, the U.S. and other embassies in Port-au-Prince issued another public statement of support for the unelected, de facto Prime Minister Dr. Ariel Henry as interim leader of Haiti, and have continued to tout his 'political agreement' over another broader, earlier accord shepherded by civil society. The hubris that makes us believe we should pick the winner—again—is impressive. This cycle of international political interventions in Haiti has consistently produced catastrophic results. More negative impacts to Haiti will have calamitous consequences not only in Haiti, but in the U.S. and our neighbors in the hemisphere."

Of course, this is one man's opinion, albeit a presumably informed one considering his position. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki answered questions about Foote's resignation in a press briefing, with some pushback from the administration:

Psaki: Daniel Foote, top U.S. Haiti envoy who resigned over migrant expulsions, "had ample opportunity to raise concerns about migration during his tenure. He never once did so...His views were put forward, they were valued, they were heard. Different policy decisions were made"pic.twitter.com/HCzBwCFs7R
— CBS News (@CBS News) 1632414526

The most recent upheaval in Haiti comes in the wake of its president being assassinated in July. But Haiti has a long and storied history that's worth learning about to see how the U.S. and other countries have directly contributed to the current economic and humanitarian crises there. (Find an excellent read for that here.) A series of devastating natural disasters in the past couple of decades has added to the nation's suffering as well.

Figuring out the best way to help floundering countries we're partially responsible for crippling and the best way to respond to humans fleeing such places is no simple challenge. But high profile resignations such as Foote's may at least draw people's attention to places like Haiti so that we can learn and understand what has led up to the crises we face now.

From Your Site Articles

Americans' push to help Afghan refugees is refreshing. Let's apply that energy to all refugees.

Canva

When a spotlight is shone on a tragedy, it's natural for people of goodwill to respond. Images and individual stories in the media are powerful reminders that our humanity connects us all, prompting our desire to save our fellow human beings from suffering to well up within us.

That impulse has led to a widespread outcry to help Afghan refugees fleeing the Taliban after U.S. forces started pulling out of the country. The sudden wave of proactive compassion is heartening. The calls to raise the refugee ceiling, the people offering to open their homes, the donations to support evacuation and resettlement efforts—all of it is great, truly.

It's also what we should have been doing for the millions of refugees already awaiting resettlement before two weeks ago.

Refugees needing a safe haven isn't new. It's not even new for Afghanistan. As Chiara Trincia, Associate Director of Public Affairs at the International Rescue Mission says, "The scenes from Kabul in recent days have shocked the world, and rightly so. But even before the latest dramatic developments in Afghanistan, Afghan refugees constitute the second-largest and one of the most protracted refugee populations in the world, with millions more internally-displaced."

Trincia says that half the population of Afghanistan is in urgent need of humanitarian assistance due to forty years of conflict, natural disasters, poverty, and now COVID-19. However, she adds, "While recent efforts to evacuate Afghans affiliated with the US mission are both laudable and necessary, these will benefit less than 1% of Afghans."

Afghan refugees need help. So do millions of other refugees. And if you think the U.S. is already doing a lot, we're not. At least, not compared to what we can and should be doing. If Turkey—a country with 1/27th of our GDP—can host 4 million refugees in the past 10 years (by far the most of any country) we can definitely offer more here.

According to the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees (UNHCR), there are currently more than 20 million refugees in the world. Some are languishing in refugee camps. Some are stuck in limbo in stopover countries, waiting for the opportunity to be resettled. Nearly 90 percent are being hosted in developing nations that were already overstretched before their arrival. More than half of them are younger than 18.

The pandemic, of course, has made resettlement more complicated. Last year, fewer than 35,000 refugees out of 20.7 million were resettled as countries shut down.

But even prior to the pandemic, the U.S. was sadly failing on this front, as our refugee resettlement numbers were drastically slashed to historic lows during the Trump administration and our resettlement infrastructure was nearly demolished.

Obviously, we can't resettle all 20 million of the world's refugees. But we can certainly do a lot more than we have been doing, and we should—not just because it's the right thing to do from a humanitarian standpoint, but because welcoming refugees is good for our country.

Let me say that again, loud and clear. Refugees are good for our country. That's not an opinion, but a fact based on the evidence.

"When given the rare opportunity to resettle somewhere like the United States, refugees thrive and contribute to the fabric of our communities—as they have for decades," says Trincia. Study after study has shown this. Those of us who know refugees firsthand know this. And it's simply common sense when you stop to think about it for five seconds.

Imagine you're someone fleeing oppression in a war-torn country and a nation opens its doors to you. How are you going to feel? Grateful, of course—but also loyal to the country that offered you safety and opportunity.

In a letter to top U.S. officials and the United Nations, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and former national security adviser H.R. McMaster expressed concern that orphans left in Afghanistan are vulnerable to radicalization by the Taliban, posing a potential national security threat.

"We are extremely concerned that a lack of action on this matter could result in a new generation of individuals committed to waging war against the United States," they wrote, pointing out that there are families in the U.S., Canada, and Europe who are eager to adopt these kids, potentially saving both them and the U.S. from extremist conflict.

Do we bring them here, or leave them in the hands of extremists, either to be targets of violence or radicalized themselves? It's not a hard choice.

What about the cost, though? Not an issue in the long term, as analysts have found that refugees actually have a net positive impact on the economy. Refugees are more likely to start businesses than native-born citizens or even other immigrants, so even though there's an initial upfront cost to resettle them, it's an investment that gets repaid and then some.

What about safety? Also not an issue. The vetting process for refugees (which you can see here) is the most stringent of any category of people to enter the United States. Tourists pose a greater threat than refugees. Refugees are the people fleeing terrorism and violence, not bringing it.

And again, by not resettling as many people as we can, we leave many suffering people vulnerable to extremists who would use our stinginess as a tool for anti-American radicalization. That's especially true in nations where we have inserted ourselves into conflict, helping to create some of the mess people are running from.

As far as I can see, there's no measurable downside to resettling as many refugees as we can get through the system. It's both the humanitarian and American thing to do. As a nation of immigrants founded by people fleeing persecution, it's in our DNA to open our doors to those needing refuge.

"Resettlement is both life-saving and life-changing," says Trincia. "Now more than ever, countries like the United States and its allies must up their resettlement commitments—to provide safe haven not just to Afghan refugees in urgent need, but also to the millions displaced around the world."

Click here to sign the IRC petition imploring the Biden administration to increase refugee admissions into the U.S. To learn more about the refugee situation around the world and see how else you can help, visit the IRC at rescue.org or the UN Refugee Agency at unhcr.org.

From Your Site Articles

It turns out Trump's child separation policy was even more monstrous than we knew

FRONTLINE/Twitter

Of all the harsh immigration policies the Trump administration has enacted, from slashing America's refugee resettlement program to building "The Wall," taking thousands of children away from their parents is by far the worst. The "zero tolerance" policy of separating families at the border drew so much international outrage that the administration eventually abandoned it and was ordered by the courts to reunite the families. In some cases, that process took far more than a year.

Now, an investigation shows that the implementation of the policy was even more inhumane than we knew.

According to the New York Times, five prosecuting attorneys who were told about the new policy in May of 2018 "recoiled" when Attorney General Jeff Sessions told them "We need to take away the children." The attorneys told officials in the Department of Justice that they were "deeply concerned" about the welfare of the children subject to that policy.

A week later, deputy attorney general Rod J. Rosenstein told the prosecutors on a call that it didn't matter how young the children were. Government attorneys had apparently refused to prosecute two cases in which the children were barely more than infants, and it was made clear that they should not have done that.

"Per the A.G.'s policy, we should NOT be categorically declining immigration prosecutions of adults in family units because of the age of a child," John Bash, the departing U.S. attorney in western Texas, wrote to his staff immediately after the call. Bash was the one who had declined the cases involving babies, but Rosenstein overruled him.

This information comes from a draft report of a two-years investigation by the DOJ's inspector general, which included more than 45 interviews with key officials in addition to emails and documents. Officials say the final report could change, but what was revealed is shocking, even for those who are familiar with the policy and its implementation.

ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt expressed his shock at the report on Twitter.

— (@)

Among the revelations in the report:

- A secret pilot program in 2017 along the Mexico border in Texas alarmed government attorneys. "We have now heard of us taking breastfeeding defendant moms away from their infants," one government prosecutor wrote to his superiors. "I did not believe this until I looked at the duty log."

- Border Patrol was stretched so thin from the family separation prosecutions that they missed serious felony cases, with one Texas prosecutor warning the DOJ that "sex offenders were released" as a result.

- U.S. Marshals had no warning before the policy was announced, which led to overcrowding and budget overruns because there was not preparation for it.

- DOJ officials have long claimed that they thought children would be reunited with their parents within hours, but there was no actual plan in place to get families reunited. "We found no evidence, before or after receipt of the memorandum, that DOJ. leaders sought to expedite the process for completing sentencing in order to facilitate reunification of separated families," the inspector general wrote.

Reading the NTY report, when confronted with who was ultimately responsible for the welfare of the children and for reuniting the with their parents, the officials involved in the policy either refuse to comment or point fingers elsewhere. No one wants to be the one to say, "I'm the monster," and of course the individual ultimately responsible for all federal policy is the president himself.

In fact, according to the Times:

"Gene Hamilton, a top lawyer and ally of Stephen Miller, the architect of the president's assault on immigration, argued in a 32-page response that Justice Department officials merely took direction from the president. Mr. Hamilton cited an April 3, 2018, meeting with Mr. Sessions; the homeland security secretary at the time, Kirstjen Nielsen; and others in which the president 'ranted' and was on 'a tirade,' demanding as many prosecutions as possible."

When "Prosecute 'em all!" becomes the policy or even misdemeanor illegal entry cases of asylum-seekers crossing the border in an area other than a port of entry, and no one plans for the fallout, chaos is inevitable and children ultimately pay the price.

"The department's single-minded focus on increasing prosecutions came at the expense of careful and effective implementation of the policy, especially with regard to prosecution of family-unit adults and the resulting child separations," the draft report said.

And what of the Border Patrol agents charged with carrying out the assignment of taking babies out of their parents' arms? One of them spoke to PBS Frontline about what that was like:

— (@)

Make no mistake—children were traumatized by this policy. How could they not be? And that cruelty was exactly the point. Our government decided that punishing parents by traumatizing children would be an effective deterrent for people trying to enter the U.S., no matter what their circumstances.

There are certain lines that we, as a civilized society, simply should not cross. Knowingly causing harm to children is one of those lines. And the U.S. not only crossed that line, but hurdled over it with Trump's "zero tolerance" policy. Our own "of the people, by the people" government deliberately hurting babies and children is what we should truly have zero tolerance for. Not in our name. Not our watch.

From Your Site Articles

immigration

Recommended

The photo of a drowned asylum seeker and his 23-month-old-daughter says everything about our so-called 'immigration debate.'

— (@)

When the Associated Press published Julia Le Duc's photograph of a drowned Salvadoran man, Óscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez, and his 23-month old daughter Valeria, it sparked outrage on social media. According to Le Duc, Ramírez had attempted to cross the Rio Grande after realizing he couldn't present himself to U.S. authorities to request asylum.

But beyond raising awareness via Twitter and Facebook feeds, does an image like this one have the power to sway public opinion or spur politicians to take action?

As journalism and psychology scholars interested in the effects of imagery, we study the ability of jarring photos and videos to move people from complacency to action. While graphic imagery can have an immediate impact, the window of action – and caring – is smaller than you'd think.

A political catalyst?

Photographs and videos – through their perceived authenticity – can have an effect on people.

Research suggests that the graphic photo of slain Emmett Till in his open casket served as a "political catalyst" in mobilizing Americans to action in the civil rights movement. Similarly, news images have been credited as playing an important role in ending the Vietnam War.

But not all scholars agree. A recent article argued that it was a "myth" that the iconic "napalm girl" photo swayed public opinion and hastened the end of the Vietnam War.

We must also look to psychology to understand the impacts of emotional news content. Research demonstrates that audiences need an emotional connection – and not merely a "just-the-facts" reporting approach – as "prerequisite for political action" when it comes to appreciating the importance of distant mass suffering. And imagery can trigger this emotional connection by overcoming the psychic numbing that occurs when casualties mount, images blur and lost lives become merely dry statistics.

— (@)

Images from Syria

In April 2017, gut-wrenching images seem to have awakened the world to the human atrocities happening in Syria. Following a chemical bomb attack in the town of Khan Sheikhoun, graphic photos and videos documented the horrific effects of the banned nerve agent sarin. Millions bore witness to excruciating human suffering: gasping, choking, writhing and dying. More than 500 people were injured, with at least 86 deaths, including 28 children.

The vivid, closeup images of sarin attack victims were resonant enough to break through the complacency of people and politicians accustomed to bad news emerging from the war-torn nation. In President Trump's response – which included a retaliatory missile strike – he seemed to recognize the value of the Syrian lives depicted in the horrific photos and videos.

"When you kill innocent children," he said during a news conference, "that crosses many, many lines, beyond a red line – many, many lines."

— (@)

The limits of an image

Nonetheless, even though the attacks may have briefly heightened U.S. concerns over the wars in Syria, the photographic documentation of the suffering in Syria wasn't new.

The 2015 photos of a tiny Syrian boy's lifeless body resting face down in the sand similarly stirred the world's collective consciousness. Within hours of its release, the photo had reached 20 million people through Twitter, with many more millions seeing it on the front pages of newspapers the next day. Afterwards, government restrictions on accepting refugees were loosened while private donations to organizations like the Red Cross spiked dramatically.

A year later, haunting images of a young boy in the back of an ambulance, caked in dirt and blood, galvanized the world.

But the emotional and compassionate responses to both photographs were short-lived. The bombing of civilians in Syria continued. Refugees continued risking their lives to escape the war zone.

Since the publication of Le Duc's photo of the dead migrants, supportive politicians may feel emboldened to sound the alarm on the plight of Central American migrants. Donations to immigrant aid organizations might briefly spike.

But it seems that a photograph, no matter how emotionally devastating, can only do so much.

Yes, it can create a window of time when we're motivated to act, and we'll usually do so if we have effective options to pursue. This could mean a charitable donation at the individual level or, collectively, a surge of political will. However, psychology research from the "arithmetic of compassion" suggests that sympathy for distant human suffering declines when we're presented with rising body counts. Sometimes we're discouraged by the scope of the problem and this stops us from doing things that actually make a difference – even if partial solutions can save lives. Other times, if the options for helping others seem too narrow or ineffective, we'll turn away and stop caring.

— (@)

Images can alert us to the horrors of violence, mass migration and poverty. But as we have seen time and again, photographs and news footage of human suffering generally precipitate a short-term emotional reaction, rather than a sustained humanitarian response.

Nicole Smith Dahmen is Associate Professor, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon. Paul Slovic is Professor of Psychology, University of Oregon.

This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

From Your Site Articles

When more than 2,000 children were taken from their families at the border, Julie Schwietert Collazo found it increasingly difficult to sleep.

And as the spouse of a refugee, immigration issues were already intensely personal for her family.

One night, Schwietert Collazo was listening to the radio and heard an interview with the lawyer of a detained Guatemalan mother. Yeni Gonzalez had been separated from her three children at the border while seeking asylum.

Yeni Gonzalez speaks at a press conference. Photo by Don Emmert/AFP/Getty Images.

"Something he said connected the dots for me about how some parents can be reunified with kids," says Schwietert Collazo. "He explained that Yeni was in a detention facility in Arizona and her kids were known to be in a center in NYC, and that, technically speaking, they could be reunified. She just needed to get to NYC."

Schwietert Collazo wondered what might happen if she tried to make reunification possible for this one family.

She, her husband, and some friends brainstormed and decided they wanted to try to raise bond for Gonzalez, get her to New York City, and support her until her case was heard.

Coordinating with Gonzalez's lawyer, the group immediately launched a GoFundMe, setting an arbitrary goal since they didn't yet know what Gonzalez's bond amount would be. The next morning, they learned it would be $7,500. They had already raised well beyond that overnight.

But money wasn't the only obstacle to helping bring Gonzalez and her children back together. Somehow, the group had to get her from Arizona to New York.

It wasn't as simple as planning a cross-country move. Gonzalez doesn't have a photo ID, so that eliminated the simplest and most obvious option of buying her a plane ticket. The next option — ground travel by Greyhound or Amtrak — could have put her in danger as a lone traveler. So the community got creative.

Schwietert Collazo and the group set up a rideshare relay, moving Gonzalez across the country in vehicles driven by volunteers and stopping in volunteer host homes along the way.

On July 2, Gonzalez arrived in NYC to see streets lined with supporters cheering for her. Accompanied by two elected officials and her lawyer the next day, Gonzalez visited with her children for the first time since their separation.

Gonzalez embraces Janey Pearl, one of the volunteers who helped drive her cross-country to NYC. Photo by Don Emmert/AFP/Getty Images.

A nationwide injunction in June 2018 ordered all separated families to be reunited within a month. The logistics of that order, however, are proving to be nothing but pure chaos.

The injunction ordered all children under 5 to be reunified with their parents within 14 days and all older children to be reunited within 30 days. Even with the private funds and community help she received, Gonzalez's case will likely take longer than that.

For other families, the challenges of reunification are even more overwhelming.

For starters, kids — some of them preverbal — have been moved all over the country with little to no documentation that would be able to link them back to their parents. Additionally, immigration advocates and lawyers report that many parents are simply giving up their asylum claims out of desperation for reuniting with their children.

Some organizations, like the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center (MIRC) are stepping in to help clean up the mess surrounding separated families.

Previously, MIRC handled cases of "unaccompanied minors," defined as adolescents and teenagers who crossed the border alone. Now that very young children separated from their parents are included in that category, MIRC's work has grown more complicated.

Additionally, MIRC managing attorney Susan Reed says that most of the cases she sees unfortunately don't pertain to parents who are eligible for bond, like Gonzalez.

"It's relatively uncommon that people are getting bonds and being allowed to move forward with asylum claims," says Reed. That's because when Attorney General Jeff Sessions eliminated domestic violence and gang violence as grounds for asylum last month, he made it increasingly difficult for anyone to be granted asylum.

In addition, Reed says, prosecutors at the border are aggressive about trying to get people's paths to asylum cut off as quickly as possible.

"So far our clients who've been reunited have been reunited with parents who either have already been deported or are being deported," says Reed. "And even that hasn't been going that well."

As cases like Gonzalez's become less common, it's more important that individuals like Schwietert Collazo to step in and help with reunification where possible.

Getting Gonzalez closer to her children started with one person moving from compassion to action.

[rebelmouse-image 19478286 dam="1" original_size="1200x1083" caption="Gonzalez walks with members of the team that is helping her reunite with her kids, including Julie Schwietert Collazo, in back. Photo via Sen. Mike Gianaris/Twitter." expand=1]Gonzalez walks with members of the team that is helping her reunite with her kids, including Julie Schwietert Collazo, in back. Photo via Sen. Mike Gianaris/Twitter.

The most important thing, says Schwietert Collazo, is to trust the grassroots process.

"Each person who has shown up has been totally empowered to 'own' their part of the process and to be responsible for it," she says. "We haven't needed to lean on or involve any government representatives, and my experience is that when you trust your team, you can get things done more quickly." Her team's plan went from idea to full fruition in less than a week.

Schwietert Collazo hopes that her team's action plan can act as a model that others can use to support more detained parents reunite with their children.

In fact, on July 4, the group launched two more GoFundMe campaigns for two more moms, each one already approaching their $25,000 goal. Her efforts make it possible for others to contribute to the reunification effort by supporting her team or by starting a reunification project of their own in hopes that, eventually, all families separated at the border can be brought together again.

Writer and comedian Baratunde Thurston received a text at 10:55 p.m. Minutes later, he was out the door and on his way to New York's LaGuardia Airport.

"Calling our #HeretoStay Network! Youth & children separated from their families are arriving at LGA airport right now! Still being transported by American Airlines!! Meet us at terminal B arrivals right now!" read the text, sent from immigration advocacy organization United We Dream.

Thurston threw on a pair of pants, grabbed his external phone charger and passport, and caught a ride share to the airport. "Realized I left my Sharpies at home and my driver was like, 'I'm a mom. I always have crayons. Will that help?'" he recounts. "So I brought some crayons."

🚨Calling our #HeretoStay Network! Youth & children separated from their families are arriving at @LGAairport right… https://t.co/J0Rag7L6Uj
— United We Dream (@United We Dream) 1529548703

Organizations like United We Dream, Make the Road, Jewish Action, T'ruah, and the ACLU were joined by hundreds of supporters to take a stand against family separation.

Earlier in the day, President Donald Trump had responded to backlash over his administration's "zero tolerance" policy about undocumented immigrants caught crossing the border by issuing an executive order ostensibly designed to end the practice of separating families. With these now-unaccompanied children being flown into New York for a placement in facility, advocacy groups sprung into action.

We are in the Southwest terminal at @LGAairport with @UNITEDWEDREAM. Children are still arriving on planes tonight… https://t.co/y13L2fcpcv
— Bend the Arc: Jewish Action (@Bend the Arc: Jewish Action) 1529545725

Am at LaGuardia airport with fellow New Yorkers to greet and witness immigrant children arrivals. @unitedwedream https://t.co/SAdEyo4dxn
— Baratunde (@Baratunde) 1529553384

For the next several hours, protesters held signs, greeted children, said chants, and sang songs.

"There are few things New Yorkers hate more than LaGuardia Airport," said Thurston the morning after the protests. "But one of those things is state-sanctioned child kidnapping. So it was beautiful to see hundreds of my fellow New Yorkers show up for immigrants and human rights last night."

On Twitter, he urged his more than 238,000 followers to "keep the direct actions coming."

“This is what solidarity looks like.” Right now at LaGuardia. Our tax dollars have funded the terrorization of fami… https://t.co/WtD6BUtClz
— Baratunde (@Baratunde) 1529554836

Terminals are packed with HUNDREDS of NYers who showed up in solidarity for children, with messages of love, singin… https://t.co/dAE5aJg59M
— Make the Road NY 🦋 (@Make the Road NY 🦋) 1529560455

Even if the practice of separating families comes to an end, Trump's executive order might not improve immigration policy.

Some even argue that it'll make things worse. His order ditches the idea of children and parents being held in separate detention facilities in favor of families being housed together in the same place. If child separation was inhumane, family internment isn't a vast improvement.

Our immigration system is broken, and as much as some supporters of Trump's policies might say the answer is simply for people to come to the U.S. through legal means (it should be noted that crossing the border in order to seek asylum is legal), it's harder than ever for people to do.

These problems go further back than just this one president. In May, the ACLU released a report cataloging abuses in immigration detention facilities dating back to 2009. Recent reports by investigative journalism organization Reveal found that a number of people within the immigration detention and shelter industry had backgrounds that included sexual assault and abuse. That group also reported on a lawsuit that alleges that some immigrant children being held were forcibly injected with psychiatric drugs to make them more docile.

These aren't new problems. They didn't start with Trump, and if nothing is done, they won't end with him, either.

We are live from NYC's LaGuardia Airport where Trump admin has sent immigrant children separated from their parents. We are here to witness where they are taking them. (Rafael Shimunov) sign up for call bit.ly/actionready
Posted by Working Families Party on Wednesday, June 20, 2018

It seems now more than any other time in recent history, people really are paying attention — and taking action.

Those who showed up at LaGuardia are evidence of that. And if that focus remains, systemic change of America's broke, cruel immigration system is possible.

Lawyers' Committee

Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights

Luis Canales will be casting a ballot. He hopes you'll do the same.

It's been a long journey, but 29-year-old Luis Canales is ready to cast a ballot in his first ever presidential election.

Today, Luis is a third-year law student at Villanova University, where he volunteers for the school's Clinic for Asylum, Refugee and Emigrant Services (CARES) program, a faculty-supervised clinic where students provide free legal representation to refugees, immigrants, and asylum-seekers in the U.S. Just years earlier, he was among them, a Honduran asylum-seeker trying to navigate our country's convoluted immigration system.

Luis holds the shoes he wore during his travels to the U.S. from Honduras. Photo courtesy of Luis Canales.

At age 16, in an attempt to escape a life besieged by gang violence, Luis fled his home in Honduras.

The 12th of 14 children born to a poor family in the town of Siguatepeque, Luis says he was active at school and in his community and vocal in his opposition to guns, drugs, and gangs. It was those stances that got him targeted by the gang MS-13. After being shot at by MS-13 members when he was 15, Luis had no choice but to leave the country.

"The trip was so horrible," he says, describing his 2004 journey to the U.S. "I used a cargo train in Mexico to make it to the United States. Even though I [faced] a lot of danger, and hunger, and suffering, and coldness, and everything else that you can think of, as being outside, on top of the cargo train, I just had in my mind: 'Luis, you have to keep on going. If you go back to Honduras, you're going to be killed.' That was my incentive to continue the trip."

The city cathedral in Comayagua, Honduras, near Siguatepeque. Photo by Orlando Sierra/AFP/Getty Images.

Recounting his trip, Luis describes horrors that no teenager should have to witness. "I saw people falling from the train, being cut in half," he says. "One of the people, I actually heard him yelling when he was on his way down to the train wheels. ... Seeing those things was very difficult for me."

His first trip to the U.S. was cut short. Immediately upon arrival in Eagle Pass, Texas, Luis was placed in a shelter before eventually being returned home to Honduras. As a minor with no relatives in the U.S., he could not stay. Upon his return, he again found himself targeted by gangs.

In total, he made four trips to the U.S., eventually connecting with family in Pennsylvania, where he began the long process of establishing legal status.

It took five and a half years for Luis to be granted asylum in the U.S. He later became a permanent legal resident before becoming a full-fledged citizen in August 2014.

More than 7,500 miles worth of travel and years of legal maneuvering later, Luis made it.

Photo by William Thomas Cain/Getty Images.

Immigration is a hot topic in the 2016 election, and it's certainly been on Luis' mind.

"I have been insulted by one of the candidates many, many times," Luis said, referencing Donald Trump. "You know, calling immigrants in general very bad words, and [saying] we only come to this country to take from the country."

Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric was a slap in the face to Luis, who not only went through the arduous process of teaching himself English but has taken pains to give back to others through his volunteer work.

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump at the second presidential debate. Photo by Paul J. Richards/AFP/Getty Images.

"We immigrants, refugees, and asylum-seekers do not come here because we did not have anything else to do, or because we wanted an easy life," Luis adds. "We have come here for survival, for opportunities, for a better life for our children. We do not come to take. We come to give, and we give back a lot, especially to those communities that have welcomed us. We work really hard to give back as much as we can."

This year, while tens of millions of people will vote, nearly half the country will probably sit this one out. If you're in the latter group, Luis hopes he can change your mind.

"Your vote is your voice," he says.

Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images.

Make your voice heard and vote.

asylum

Respected U.S. diplomat resigns over 'inhumane' treatment of Haitians with scathing letter

Americans' push to help Afghan refugees is refreshing. Let's apply that energy to all refugees.

It turns out Trump's child separation policy was even more monstrous than we knew

The photo of a drowned asylum seeker and his 23-month-old-daughter says everything about our so-called 'immigration debate.'

A political catalyst?

Images from Syria

The limits of an image

This group of friends made an amazing cross-country relay to reunite a mom with her kids.

When more than 2,000 children were taken from their families at the border, Julie Schwietert Collazo found it increasingly difficult to sleep.

Schwietert Collazo wondered what might happen if she tried to make reunification possible for this one family.

But money wasn't the only obstacle to helping bring Gonzalez and her children back together. Somehow, the group had to get her from Arizona to New York.

A nationwide injunction in June 2018 ordered all separated families to be reunited within a month. The logistics of that order, however, are proving to be nothing but pure chaos.

Some organizations, like the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center (MIRC) are stepping in to help clean up the mess surrounding separated families.

As cases like Gonzalez's become less common, it's more important that individuals like Schwietert Collazo to step in and help with reunification where possible.

Schwietert Collazo hopes that her team's action plan can act as a model that others can use to support more detained parents reunite with their children.

Watch hundreds of New Yorkers coming together in support of immigrant children.

Writer and comedian Baratunde Thurston received a text at 10:55 p.m. Minutes later, he was out the door and on his way to New York's LaGuardia Airport.

Organizations like United We Dream, Make the Road, Jewish Action, T'ruah, and the ACLU were joined by hundreds of supporters to take a stand against family separation.

For the next several hours, protesters held signs, greeted children, said chants, and sang songs.

Even if the practice of separating families comes to an end, Trump's executive order might not improve immigration policy.

It seems now more than any other time in recent history, people really are paying attention — and taking action.

This immigrant and law student wants you to make your voice heard on Nov. 8.

Luis Canales will be casting a ballot. He hopes you'll do the same.

It's been a long journey, but 29-year-old Luis Canales is ready to cast a ballot in his first ever presidential election.

At age 16, in an attempt to escape a life besieged by gang violence, Luis fled his home in Honduras.

In total, he made four trips to the U.S., eventually connecting with family in Pennsylvania, where he began the long process of establishing legal status.

Immigration is a hot topic in the 2016 election, and it's certainly been on Luis' mind.

This year, while tens of millions of people will vote, nearly half the country will probably sit this one out. If you're in the latter group, Luis hopes he can change your mind.

Woman who was pressured to quit her job to raise stepdaughter's baby makes a bold decision

15 hilarious parenting comics that are almost too real

Star neuroscientist Andrew Huberman breaks down two simple exercises to improve vision

Golden Retriever's unbridled excitement over new dog bed is too sweet not to watch

'Wicked' author reveals how one line in 'The Wizard of Oz' inspired Elphaba and Glinda's story