A few days away from President-elect Donald Trump's inauguration, many in the U.S. and abroad are anxiously waiting to learn his administration's immigration policies.
The incoming administration has not been shy to anticipate its plans to dramatically curb immigration and enact what they promise will be the largest mass deportation operation in American history. But as they prepare to implement Trump's vision, a lesser-known visa on the chopping blocks could have devastating effects for some Latinos already in the U.S.
T and U visas are given to survivors of crime (including trafficking and violence against women) who are helping law enforcement investigate and prosecute their cases. The visas are intended to encourage survivors to come forward, by giving them a safe future in the U.S. even if they are targeted for retaliation by criminal organizations. Project 2025— a conservative initiative the President-elect denounced in the campaign trail but now has seemingly adopted, with key members set to join his administration— wants to make these visas a thing of the past.
One regulation proposed by Project 2025 would restrict eligibility for U visas to people who are "actively providing significant material assistance to law enforcement." Immigration Impact explains that the new measure would impose hurdles to potential beneficiaries. Given that U visa backlogs are measured in years, "it's hard to see how someone who was eligible when the application was filed would still be eligible when it was reviewed."
Eliminating these visas would not be the first time the Trump administration made it harder for foreign-born people to enter the U.S. legally, according to NBC News. Under his watch, visa denials and extensions shot up and refugee admissions were slashed, a move that is expected to come back during his second term in office.
But unlike other immigration documents, eliminating U and T visas, with their humanitarian angles designed to help marginalized communities, would have devastating effects for immigrants who seek refuge in the U.S., Iris Cardenas, an assistant professor at the University of Maryland School of Social Work said.
Cardenas, whose research focuses on intimate partner violence (IPV) within the Latino community, recently sat down with The Latin Times to discuss some of the implications of eliminating these visas on the Latino and the immigrant community in the U.S.
This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Latin Times: Latino culture is often characterized as a machista (sexist) one. In what ways can this be seen once these families become immigrants? Are there any cultural factors that influence an immigrant's decision to remain in an abusive relationship?
Iris Cardenas: So we do know that there are cultural factors. The cultural context influences the experience of intimate partner violence. But it is very mixed. We know that for some people those cultural values, traditional gender roles, specifically, impact their help-seeking behavior. So those who endorse "machismo" or "marianismo" tend to want to stay in the relationship, even if there is violence, because they are looking for family unity. That's sort of like what the goal is, or maybe women are to endure the violence because that's their role. So we do know that that's an influence and impacts, especially among those more traditional families in the Latino community.
We also know that for Latino families who are immigrants and do endorse those values back in their home country and then they migrate to the United States, oftentimes the women tend to have a little bit more of financial independence because they have access, maybe to resources that they didn't have before, and that is seen sometimes by the male partner as a transgression on their traditional roles, and that may also initiate or trigger violent acts.
I do want to say that this is traditionally what we know. There's a little bit more research that cultural values could also be a protective factor, and it's more so, of a change in the interpretation of what cultural values are. And we see that a lot more in second generation immigrants, where they are starting to reconceptualize what those values mean for them. For many of them, "feminismo" actually means to be in a healthy family rather than stay in a family that is violent, for instance.
LT: Is domestic violence a current issue among immigrant communities? If so, why is it not being talked about enough?
IC: It is an issue and I do want to make sure that this is clear. This is an issue that is present across all different communities. The prevalence is pretty comparable, I think, when we talk about Latinos and then when we talk about immigrant communities, specifically, the rates vary. It's not that immigrant Latinos tend to have more rates of intimate partner violence, is that these rates vary.
But what is concerning about this is that the impact of the violence is very detrimental. And so for immigrant communities that don't have access to resources, the impact of the violence exacerbates the disparity they already experience. The reason why I think is not being talked about is because there is a lack of knowledge on the impact of violence. A lot of people think that the person who is victimized is the only one who is suffering. Which is true to some extent, but the impact of the violence goes beyond that one person. It affects the family, it affects children, it even affects communities. We are also not talking about it, I believe, because of the status that immigrant individuals hold in this country. Immigrants are often viewed as sort of "second class citizens," even when they have been when they have proper documentation to be in this country and even when you have immigrants that have become citizens.
LT: Could you discuss U visas? How do current immigration policies, such as these visas, assist survivors of domestic and intimate partner violence?
IC: Sure, so there are the T visas and the U visas. To explain them briefly, these are just visas that provide protection. The T visas provide protection to victims of trafficking, the U visas provide protections to victims of crime, who assist law enforcement. They provide legal status and they provide safety for these individuals. So, oftentimes for those who are victims, so survivors of intimate partner violence, if they decide to go through a legal criminal case, and work with law enforcement, then they have this sort of safety. So by providing this legal status, what it means is that they are able to work. They're able to gain some income, look for jobs, and access different types of services. Because they have a legal status now they are also eligible to health insurance, and to other specific services. Essentially, they are able to help themselves become a little more self-sufficient to either leave the abusive relationship completely or don't go back to an abusive partner or not end up with another abusive partner.
LT: How would eliminating visas like the U Visa affect immigrant survivors of domestic violence in the U.S.? What could this mean for their safety and ability to seek justice?
IC: I mean, it's just going to be devastating for these victims not having access to this type of visa. It would obviously increase their economic dependency on the person who perpetuates the violence or the abuser. So it really limits their ability to achieve independence on their own. Economic dependency and need are big risk factors for being a victim of intimate partner violence. We also know that removing the option for U Visa will make it less likely for victims and survivors of intimate partner violence to seek the criminal legal justice system, and so it will likely decrease their help-seeking behavior. So there will be prolonged intimate partner violence, which again, will just impact the consequences of the violence.
LT: How does this decision of eliminating visas advance Trump's agenda? What would the point of eliminating this visa be?
IC: I'm honestly not sure. I think that people have different ideologies. At least from the social work sphere, we often talk about the "worthy poor" theory, which talks about who we think is worthy of help. We do see some people who are in need and we help them because "they try hard, but they still couldn't make it" and then there are some people who are in need but we look the other way because we believe they put themselves in the situation, which often happens with homeless people. So I believe that's some of the mentality happening with immigrants. Some people think "you came here illegally and now you're in this situation that is on you, why are we providing assistance and help?" With U and T visas, people also say "this is a path to citizenship, why are we giving you these resources and not investing them into a U.S. citizens instead?"
LT: What should migrants who benefit, or seek to benefit from these visas, keep in mind ahead of the Trump administration? Is there anything they can do to protect themselves and advocate for themselves?
IC: There's a lot of grassroots movements happening across different states and parts of the nation, and what is recommended is for immigrants to seek them out. We recommend seeking these groups out at the community level because we do know that they can provide a stronger trusted relationship and more assistance, rather than larger institutions. Another thing is education, immigrants need to know their rights. I guess what I'm saying is that not-all-is-lost. There are people who are still advocating for these visas to stay. But for those who don't have a legal status to stay in this country and who are victims of violence, if they do want to advocate, they have to be very careful because this is the political context, they can be putting themselves in danger by exposing themselves. I will say work with a community, or a local program in your community, to see how they can help you. And if this is what you want to do, you should do it sooner rather than later because we just know that if this ends up happening, resources will be very limited.
© 2024 Latin Times. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
