S1: The opinions shared by our guests in today's episode are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Port of Entry or KPBS.
S2: It comes as no surprise that the first year of President Trump's second term gives us a lot to reflect on , and much more to digest. Much of the national conversation has centered on international issues , particularly the actions and intentions of the United States abroad.
S1: From Venezuela and Greenland to Mexico and beyond. But what's been just as striking is what's been happening here at home.
S2: And the headlines have been especially telling.
S3: Following breaking news in Minneapolis , where a woman was shot and killed by an Ice agent , Ice protesters banging on federal officers vehicles who deployed tear gas to disperse crowds overnight.
S4: Unrest and anger in Minneapolis after federal agents shot and killed another person.
S3: Federal government and local agents are offering up some very different views of what happened in Minneapolis.
S2: Federal immigration enforcement operations have been in the spotlight after protests and confrontations led to the fatal shootings of Rene Nicole Goode and , more recently , Alex Peretti , both at the hands of federal agents. Officials say investigations are still underway , and critics have raised serious questions about how these actions are being carried out.
S1:
S2:
S5: Dan Marino , mi nunca puedo jamas en mi vida a mis documentos en la calle. Nunca nunca nunca nunca.
S1: Cristian , a 20 year old convenience store cashier says he's been stabbed four times in the past two years. He believes he's been targeted because of his skin complexion.
S5: He said Como unos dos Anjos para ya yo creo unas cuatro veces me pido mis documentos a yo. Yo tengo mi situation me a regular.
S1: Christian says he has legal status , which means he doesn't fear deportation.
S2: Jesus , a waiter at a downtown San Diego restaurant , shared that some of his acquaintances were detained at work.
S6: I see those amigos pasado contenido de sus sus familiares , sus ninos , sus esposa porque unidos y la Paz dos tres meses en la la castle.
S1: He says some were held by ice for as long as three months , completely separated from their families.
S2: The detentions disrupted their livelihoods , he says. Incidents like these have left many workers obviously feeling anxious. We're also hearing that many vulnerable workers have stopped going to work or have pulled back from everyday activities like shopping.
S1: For example , Roberto Chavez , a produce import export manager , says his sales have dramatically dropped since last year.
S7: Press service in Las Ventas Y todo esto es M-Pesa mas lento la gente de hoy a consumer sabio aqui en México en Los quedo mucho producto.
S1: Okay , he says many of his customers in the US have stopped buying produce altogether , leaving much of it to go to waste on the Mexican side of the border.
S2: New enforcement approaches by the Department of Homeland Security through Ice and CBP have made daily life more difficult for border commuters.
S1: Like longer wait times , says Valeria , a worker in downtown San Diego.
S8: Mas Como San Jacinto cruzado mas rapido a comparison to dos tres.
S1: The overwhelming majority of people we interviewed echoed that sentiment. Wait times in the pedestrian lanes have increased , making the commute more tense and stressful.
S2: And those tensions aren't just limited to those crossing into the US. Many commuters report that Mexican authorities have also become stricter in enforcing their immigration laws , sometimes sending American residents of Mexico back to the U.S. for lacking proper visa or vehicle documentation.
S1: One of them is Marcela Osorio , whose son was denied entry back into Mexico while driving her car , which was not registered in his name.
S8: Gonzalez el caro estar el registrado a nombre de mijo , Houston a seguranca y el motivo. No no , no.
S1: A similar situation happened to Carlos , a dual U.S. and Mexican citizen who works in the moving business.
S6: Excuse me. You. Know my passport ? Oh , no. Why me ? Regresa para San Diego.
S2: Carlos says that he was denied entry back into Tijuana because he lacked documentation proving his Mexican citizenship.
S1: These enforcement changes come amid broader diplomatic tensions between the US and Mexico.
S2: And commuters say the impact of these changes is being felt in their everyday lives. To help us understand how all of this has unfolded.
S1: Both nationally and here in the border region.
S2: We're joined by two guests.
S1: KPBS border reporter Gustavo Solis and Cassandra Lopez , director of litigation of Al Otro Lado.
S2: From KPBS , this is Port of Entry.
S1: Where we tell cross-border stories that connect us.
S2: I'm Alan Lilienthal.
S1: And I'm Natalia Gonzalez.
S2: This is a port of entry conversation.
S1: Trump 2.0 the Immigration and border impact. Stay tuned. You're listening to Port of Entry.
S9: Hello everyone. I'm Alan. With me is my co-host , Natalie. We're following up on a conversation we began in November 2024 , shortly after President Trump was elected to a second term. At the time , we were examining what that election could mean for the border and migrant communities in our region. And now , a year into Trump's return to office , we're taking stock of what has actually happened.
S1: And it has been a headline grabbing first year on immigration , to put it mildly. And to help us recap , we're joined by Gustavo Solis , KPBS border reporter. Hola , Hola , Augusto. Thank you for being here.
S9: And joining us to help explain the legal framework behind many of these changes is immigration attorney Cassandra Lopez , director of litigation at.
S5: Al Otro. Lado.
S9: Lado. Hello.
S10: Hello. Thank you for having me.
S9: Thank you. Welcome , Cassandra.
S1: For being here. Cassandra. Muchas gracias. Let's start with you , Gustavo. Much of your reporting this year has reached national audiences. And for listeners who may not be familiar with your work , can you.
S11: I've just kind of been documenting what the Trump administration has been doing in terms of realizing his mass deportation agenda. So a lot of that has been reporting on how decisions made in Washington impact people on the ground here , and really providing a face to these abstract policies of detention and deportation and mass arrest , and really just showing how it impacts individuals and communities. Another big threat that I've been pursuing this year is surveillance technologies and how those help the mass deportation efforts , but undermine our civil liberties.
S1: You had a lot of stories that were top stories for KPBS , but for example , the one about federal data revealing the truth about immigration detention was a big story and national story.
S11: Explainers or fact checking , really pointing out that there's a disconnect between what people in Washington tell us and what the truth is on the ground. Even this morning , I was hearing about how they're going after national security threats , the worst of the worst murderers and rapists. And the story I did was just looking at ISIS own data on who they are detaining and what their criminal background is. And it overwhelmingly shows that the majority of people in detention do not have a violent criminal record or any criminal record. They're mostly for immigration violations , which are civil violations.
S1: Another big story that you covered , Gustavo was about lawyers using habeas corpus in efforts to free immigrants from detention. Can you tell us about that story ? And maybe we can bring Cassandra to the conversation , and she can explain to us a little bit about habeas corpus.
S11: That was a massive story. One of my favorite ones of the year. And it wouldn't have happened without Cassandra and other immigration lawyers. It was just this nationwide like movement , but not really movement , just lawyers everywhere filing these habeas petitions as almost a last ditch effort to get people out of immigration detention. There's a paper trail in court that is semi-public , and you can see in detail how people were detained , what their background is , why they are challenging the tension of it. It tells the entire story of what's been happening around the country. I mean , some of these cases are I remember day laborers in Los Angeles that got caught up in those raids being sent to a detention center. Some of the most tragic ones were where people out of state , where there are , is more cooperation between local and federal law enforcement places. I remember in Georgia and Florida , people are getting pulled over by local police for a traffic stop , and then local police calling Ice , and they end up in Otay Mesa. And I think it was also very inspiring seeing these immigration lawyers , these attorneys make a good faith effort to fight and push back against that by filing these petitions in federal courts and really challenging the detention that was happening. So it was an example of everything wrong that was happening , but also some inspiring examples of people trying to do something about it.
S9: Can you briefly. Tell.
S2: Tell. Us.
S9: Us. What.
S2: What.
S9: Habeas corpus.
S10: Is ? So habeas corpus is a provision in the Constitution that allows individuals to challenge unlawful detention that can either be detained by the federal government , detention by the state government by immigration. And so if a person is being unlawfully detained , they can ask a judge to grant a petition for habeas corpus , which is to release the body. It's a law that allows anyone , whether they're a citizen or a non-citizen , to challenge unlawful detention within the United States.
S2:
S10: So maybe to back up. Immigration detention has been a feature of immigration law now for many years , for decades. But the Trump administration has dramatically increased the use of immigration detention. Starting last year. In the summer , they began taking the position that anyone who entered the country without permission , who entered without inspection , would be subject to mandatory custody. And this was a reversal of really decades of interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act and a total about face where even if a person can show that they're not a flight risk and that they're not a danger to the community. The Trump administration is saying if you cross the border without inspection , you must stay in immigration detention until your immigration case is resolved , until either you're granted relief or you're deported. And so the one avenue because immigration judges now , when there are individuals who appear before them , who before last summer would otherwise have most likely been granted bond appear before them seeking bond , the judges are saying , I don't have jurisdiction pursuant to a BIA case called IRA Hurtado , and now the remedy or the ability for those individuals to seek release is to go into federal court and file a petition for habeas corpus. And largely across the country , federal courts have been granting those petitions in almost every possible scenario , whether it's a person who entered without inspection. And we've seen cases where people have been paroled in to seek asylum , and then they're detained by Ice. And judges have been ordering that Ice released , that those individuals under the same conditions of parole , that they had been previously granted. Similarly , people that have been granted bond are swept up in some of these immigration enforcement operations and placed into custody in federal court. Judges have been ordering release under the same terms that were previously imposed when bond was set. Our experience , especially here in San Diego , is that largely the courts have been granting these petitions and finding that the detention , in fact is unlawful.
S2: The habeas corpus is being upheld.
S10: Habeas corpus petitions have been granted , which means that the district court judges are finding that the individuals in the in in the respective cases that they have been detained in violation of the immigration law , often were making a variety of arguments. You might be arguing that it violates due process or the federal government's own requirement that they follow their own internal policies. But essentially , the judges are finding that people are being detained in violation of the law and granting those petitions ? Yes.
S2:
S10: So I'm unaware of anyone filing , say , a lawsuit for like a tort claim , like , say , you know.
S11: That'd be interesting. Yeah. You detained me for months. You kept me out of work. You have all these damages.
S10: And I should be reimbursed. I would suspect that courts are going to be reluctant to , you know , hold Ice accountable in that regard. However , they have been granting attorney's fees and appointing attorneys to represent individuals. So , like I have two cases where the government has agreed to settle and compensate for the work that we've done in other cases. The federal defenders of San Diego here has been appointed by the court to represent individuals , so they are granting some compensation in the form of legal representation. But I'm not aware of anyone filing a lawsuit , although that's something interesting to consider. Whether there is any grounds there , I would doubt that there's going to be an easy remedy for people that have been wrongfully detained to obtain , say , compensation from Ice for their unlawful detention.
S2:
S11: But that's a frustrating thing that that folks I've interviewed tell me that yes , they are happy that as a result of a petition they got out. They can live at home , go back to work , fight their deportation from the comfort of their home. It doesn't erase the damage that was done by that detention. And that sense of injustice is still there. They're still angry and bitter that it happened. But as far as like a way to stop it from happening , I yeah , I don't know.
S10: So and I think that's what the habeas law guarantees or provides is right. If you're being wrongfully detained. Here's the remedy under the law that you can use to seek release. It doesn't specifically articulate any type of , say , damages that should be granted or anything beyond release of the individual. And right now , the authority to detain is coming from both a memo that the that Ice issued back in July. And then it's a BIA case. So the Ice and other entities , CBP or other entities that are detaining individuals. Under this interpretation , they're relying they're saying the Board of Immigration Appeals decided in this case , Uehara Hurtado , that anybody that entered without inspection should be detained. So that's what I'm doing. I'm just following the BIA. And then the federal Court is looking at that case and saying , oh no , this is this violates due process. This violates the actual language of the Immigration and Nationality Act that violates other laws or potential regulations. So what.
S1: Is BIA I'm sorry.
S10: The Board of Immigration Appeals , that's the appellate body that if you lose your case or if the government loses its case before the immigration court , it appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals. And then from the board , if you want to appeal , you would go up to the Circuit Court of Appeals here in California. That would be the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
S1: Let's zoom out a little bit and talk about the immigration policies that changed during 2025 , and how can we compare them to other administrations. For starters , the first day that Trump took office , the CBP one app shut down and it affected the border Tijuana and San Diego , specifically Tijuana and all of the migrant shelters you covered. A lot about that. Gustavo , maybe you can start talking about that. The CBP one up shutting down.
S11: Yeah , I think that that was interesting to me because it showed the relationship between the Biden administration and the Trump administration , where the Biden administration created CBP one and really restricted asylum outside of CBP one. Right. They kind of were trying to funnel it into , you know , if you want asylum , get CBP one. If not , you're going to have a harder time accessing it. Once that is done , the only thing Trump has to do is get rid of a CBP one Biden already got rid of the other avenues , right ? Or made it harder for people to pursue those avenues. So you can see how the decisions one administration made , the Biden administration made it a little bit easier for Trump to restrict it. I think that also highlights a critique I've heard for decades now over the immigration system , is that there hasn't been immigration reform and without legal changes. We're left with a system where one president has executive orders or different rules and different policies , and somebody else can come in and replace them. So the system is kind of set up to be vulnerable in this way , that it's vulnerable to the whims of one administration , to the other. And I think the CBP one situation showed that these changes happen in Washington. And meanwhile , thousands of of folks who were , quote unquote , doing it the right way , waiting for the appointment have their day to come in. All of a sudden we're told , oh , nope , sorry. Too late. You can't do it anymore. And it's incredibly unfair for the people who are waiting , but they don't really have any other course. I think for a couple of ways , that policy change just underscores the chaotic nature of the immigration system.
S10: I would agree and would also point out unless you apply through CP one , you cannot apply for asylum. So if an individual comes to the port of entry and says , I fear persecution in my home country and they don't go through CBP one , then they're not eligible to apply for asylum. They might be eligible to apply for other forms of immigration relief that are harder to get and are less generous. Asylum ultimately provides a pathway to citizenship , withholding of removal , or protection under the convention Against Torture. Do not , and I think it's all part of this. What I would say effort to make it harder to apply for forms of relief , to make it harder to get into court , to have an immigration judge hear your case , to decide your case freely or objectively , to have an objective fact finder. There have been other changes to the asylum system that have made it essentially more difficult to apply for asylum , and easier for immigration judges to dismiss cases without hearing the facts. So even if a person is able to get in to apply for asylum , the government has done things like they have the asylum cooperative agreements where the government's asking IJS to deny asylum cases because they believe that they can deport an individual to a third country. So Honduras or Guatemala under the asylum cooperative agreement. So that basically means like if I fear persecution and I'm asking for asylum , the government is saying that shouldn't be granted because we're going to be able to deport this person to Honduras or Guatemala , even if that person has never been there , even if that person has no ties to that community , etc.. And then the other thing that I think that I would note with the asylum system is that immigration judges have been granting pre-term mission more frequently. We've been hearing about these cases where basically , in an effort , the purported effort to move cases along. In light of this growing backlog of immigration cases , IJS are dismissing cases when they have when they find that the applications are incomplete. So if the immigration judge believes that there's like a specific substantive answer that hasn't been adequately fleshed out or answered every single question on the i5 89 , the application form , the IJ can dismiss the case without getting to the facts of the case. So a person might have a legitimate fear of death or persecution in their home country. But if they didn't adequately answer a question to the IJ satisfaction , the IJ may dismiss that case. And oftentimes individuals are pro se. They don't have an immigration lawyer. They're filling out these forms on their own. Or maybe they are working with , you know , a family member who speaks English that can help translate. Or , you know , it's no surprise that often people may not fill out the form perfectly or to the IJS satisfaction. And in those cases , their cases are unfortunately getting dismissed. So I think overall , what I've seen is just an effort to curtail the use of asylum and make it really difficult to apply in front of an immigration judge and be heard and have a neutral arbiter decide your case.
S1: Thank you , Cassandra , for that answer. We will be back after a short break.
S2: You're listening to. Port of entry.
S1: And then there was the end of humanitarian parole. And we had an episode about a Venezuelan mother who entered the US legally. But later she lost her legal status due to a policy change , which was the end of humanitarian parole.
S10: So if you are paroled in or if your granted , say , a temporary protected status , the government is saying we're giving you permission to be here. you can apply for an employment authorization document and you can be here. We're not going to deport you. You can work legally while you're either potentially asylum case proceeds. So people have been paroled in , say , through CBP. One to seek asylum in the United States , or TPS , is usually used in the case where there has been some kind of natural disaster , like a , you know , hurricane or a huge earthquake , or maybe there's some kind of war happening. So places like Haiti , Venezuela have had TPS , and the government last year just abruptly ended these programs and with very little notice to give people an opportunity to make plans. So some people with , say , TPS , Temporary Protected status have been living in the United States for decades , working legally. They may have kids that were born here. They've established their life here. Usually. In fact , they're always law abiding because if they're not , the government is going to take their TPS status away. So these are people that are law abiding members of the community. They're often very involved with their community. They're working , their kids are in school , whatnot. And then suddenly , you know , on a dime , the government ends that status and is saying , go back to your own country. And we've seen these cases where somebody that was granted parole , in fact , I filed two habeas petitions last fall. One individual was paroled into the United States. Another individual had been granted. They were basically both paroled in for different reasons. But in any case , they were both detained at ice check ins where they were reporting as directed to Ice and complying with their obligations to report and provide information about where they're living or where they're working or whatnot. And they were detained at those interviews , separated from young children. It was extremely destabilizing for elementary school kids. When a person had a minor child that was like 2 or 3 and was was really hard. They were often they were the breadwinners of their family. So , you know , in every possible way. These families were really struggling because the government arbitrarily decided to end the programs with very little notice.
S1:
S10: So people may have other forms of relief that they could be eligible for. So you know , certainly it's important to get good immigration counsel and speak with an immigration lawyer and find out if you're married to a U.S. citizen , can you obtain status through your U.S. citizen ? Say , if you're the victim of a violent crime ? There could also be if you have a child that's has some sort of severe disability or health condition , you might be able to fight your deportation , arguing that it would cause extraordinary hardship on that child. So it's sort of a case by case analysis. Unfortunately , it's people you hear this from the public or people that are maybe not familiar with immigration law , like do it legally or , you know , I did it the right way. I stood in line , I waited. You know , if you want to come in , you got to do it the right way , do it the legal way. But the reality is it's almost impossible to get a visa doing it the legal way , because we have very much limited the ways in which people can get status legally. You know , it could be that people are eligible for some other form of relief that they could apply for. But with respect to TPS , I don't I think that there's some lawsuits pending and I haven't really been following too closely the status of those , but arguing that. But I think that the Supreme Court allowed TPS to lapse. As to Venezuela , that was last summer. So , you know , I don't know that there's any remedy as far as like arguing that it's improper to terminate TPS at this point.
S2: This might be I don't know if there's a clear answer to this , but if someone were doing it illegally today , in this day and age , what's the easiest way for someone to do that ? You said it's almost impossible for someone to do it.
S11: To be rich.
S10: To be rich. Right. So if if you are living in the United States and you're a lawful permanent resident or a citizen of the United States , you can apply for family members that are outside the United States. And if you have a spouse or you're an adult with an adult parent , then they are immediate relatives and could immediately , you know , could fairly quickly be eligible for visas. But anybody else ? So if you're a sister or a brother of a U.S. citizen , those kind of other family relationships , the line is just really long. So you might be able to apply and get your , you know , immigrate another family member. But it may take 20 years to do so. So the and then if you enter the United States without inspection , so if you cross the border without permission , you're not eligible to adjust status in the United States unless you leave the country and do it from Mexico. But then you trigger bars to reentry that now we're getting really in the weeds. But it's basically , if you're in the United States and you entered without inspection , you cannot become a lawful permanent resident in most cases , unless you leave the United States and then trigger usually a ten year bar to coming back legally. So it's sort of doing it legally. Kind of is lip service to a situation that really doesn't exist for most people , or is not a viable option for most people , because either they don't have to be thinking , what am I going to be doing 20 years from now ? I mean , hopefully living and thriving in San Diego. But , you know , it's so for people that are in have , um , immediate family that have more immediate needs , the legal immigration system is essentially nonexistent.
S2:
S10: That's part of the role of nonprofit organizations like Al Otro Lado. We file all types of petitions , both affirmative and represent people in defensive postures. They're already in removal deportation proceedings. And then we're fighting deportation. But we also have litigation. So we have at AOL , we have a Freedom of Information Act team where we're filing lawsuits , trying to shed light on particular policies , potentially with the goal of challenging them. Other organizations around the country are doing that work , trying to challenge laws that are unconstitutional or violate the due process or other laws in some way. The current immigration policy is not the result or not just the result of Donald Trump and Stephen Miller and this administration , although this is an this administration has demonstrated an extreme level of hostility towards immigrants and willingness and in fact , enthusiasm to dehumanize immigrant communities , that I think is really beyond the pale and unprecedented. Right. But the immigration system is decades in the making , right ? I mean , there have been numerous laws over the years that both Democrats and Republicans have enthusiastically signed on to increase the criminalization of immigration acts , to increase the basis by which a person can be deported for all kinds of different things. To make it harder to get immigration status in the United States. And I think this is really part of America's long term story. We've had kind of ups and downs or changes to the immigration laws over decades , and at different points in time have tended toward increased xenophobia , where we're , you know , there back in the 20s , there was the quota system where basically , you know , we were favoring immigrants from Western white European countries and disfavored immigrants from other areas. And right now , it feels like we're at a moment where at least our leaders are demonstrating and I would say xenophobia and dehumanization of non-citizens. That's really starting to , I think , affect all of us in society , because one thing we haven't quite gotten to , but it's just the increased funding for immigration enforcement and Ice in our communities and all of that. You know , there are all kinds of organizations and lawyers that are challenging the immigration laws. That's a slow process. And yet there have been some advances. Right. We , for example , there's the National Qualified Representative program that was stood up maybe a little over ten years ago , where as a result of litigation , immigration courts provide attorneys for people that are incompetent to represent themselves. They've agreed that , yes , we'll go ahead and give you a lawyer if you're incompetent. There's the legal orientation program that's continued to receive that was receiving bipartisan support over the decades. The Trump administration ended that program. But it was sort of , I think , some efforts to grant , support or acknowledge rights of non-citizens in immigration proceedings. Same goes for children. You know , there's the Flores settlement that has then , you know , resulted in recognition that children have rights , that unaccompanied children have rights. I'm not saying that the tale of immigration in the United States has just continuously been one where , you know , it's trending negatively. But the Trump administration certainly has tried to roll back a number of different advances. They've ended many of those programs that I've just mentioned or tried to whittle away at them or , you know , death by a thousand cuts make them essentially ineffective. So I guess that's my long winded answer , that yes , there are organizations that are trying to change the laws. It's slow. And also , you know , it's been it's not just the Trump administration. It's really been decades where in the United States we've increasingly criminalized immigration acts and also made it harder to apply for immigration relief.
S1: And like everything that you're saying , because it obviously reflects on the other side of the border as well with with people who cross the border every day to go to work , to go to school. Some border commuters , pedestrians mentioned that crossing the border has become more , uh , strict , that enforcement by Mexican immigration at the Mexican port of entry has become more strict.
S10: At AOL , we at.
S12: Al otro Lado , we.
S10: Have an office in um , in Tijuana , as well as in Mexico City , where we're sort of both tracking and supporting immigration issues from the Mexican side. And we have this border that's been increasingly militarized and increasingly fortified and inspections now on both sides. It's not surprising to me that Mexico has started to increase inspections with the way that the Trump administration has been speaking about Mexico and making hostile statements to Mexico , our neighbor to the south. We really should be working with the Mexican government to. It seems like that would be in our best interest , even , you know , through the stated lens of , say , like try like the Trump administration claims to be concerned about fentanyl and , you know , about drug trafficking. Well , you know , if we're going to be trying to stop that at the border , we would want to be working with the Mexican authorities instead of alienating them. So I have noticed , just anecdotally , going southbound into Tijuana , that there's more inspection and more traffic. And I think that we are only going to see that increase , especially since the Trump administration's funding and focus is on enforcement. It's not about like making the border a streamlined place to cross so that it's easy for people to live in TJ and work in the in the San Diego area , in the United States , even though it could we could have that approach , but unfortunately , that's not the case.
S1: There's also a memo posted on the CBP website saying that the agency is now authorized to collect biometric biometric data at ports of entry.
S11: They roll out these kind of mass data collecting and mass surveillance programs , and they don't always work out the way they want them to. I mean , going back to CBP , one , right , that had big issues with the facial recognition figure , right ? You had to take a picture of yourself in order to get an appointment. And early on the first , the first version of it. Haitian people struggled to get the app to recognize their face because it didn't work well with people with darker skin tones than lighter skin tones. So that's just like a practical problem with it. But on a bigger issue , you're being border patrol doesn't have a great history with mass surveillance. We've seen it in the US now. And I think that's the that's what I like to tell folks who aren't from the border region that oftentimes these technologies will begin at the border , and then they will be used in the interior of the country. We've seen it a little bit with facial recognition , but automated license plate readers are one that I've covered , and we are seeing Border Patrol use automated license plate readers to conduct immigration searches , sometimes in violation of sanctuary laws here in California. So I think the general public should be just a little concerned about how this is being rolled out. And we don't always know how this information is going to be used in the future. And I know even in the past , I think this was during the first Trump administration where some I believe some al otro lado attorneys were caught in this when the migrant caravans came around 2019 , 2018 , Border Patrol was using their technology to spy on journalists , lawyers , humanitarians who were helping the migrant caravan.
S2:
S10: About normalizing constant surveillance and constitutional issues relating to privacy and freedom from unreasonable government monitoring. Like Gustavo mentioned , I think there's concerns about tracking and spying on journalists. But really anyone activists or anyone who doesn't fully support Trump's agenda , it could also potentially be used to target and interrogate or refer for inspection , secondary inspection , people based on national origin , religious beliefs , political views. And I think there's a concern that biometrics is unreliable or concerns just about how reliable it is. So. Like Gustavo mentioned with Haitians and getting them to track facial recognition , if they're going to be using facial recognition to refer people to secondary inspection. But it's unreliable. I think that could then result in , you know , people being erroneously sent for secondary inspection or interrogation. So I think it raises a host of concerns , and we want the government to clearly articulate why they're doing this , how they're maintaining security. What happens if there's a data breach , what they're going to do with the data , how long it's going to be stored. Things like those concerns. I think we would want we want answers from the government about those questions. And I think it , you know , generally we should all be concerned that the government is , you know , surveilling us. It sounds something like we hear about in China. And I don't think Americans are ready for the government to be monitoring their every move. Yeah.
S2: Yeah. Maybe to help us digest all this , we can leave off as we wrap this up with some a little bit of guidance from you guys , some some practical advice on what we can do moving forward. Our listeners can do.
S11: If and when the undocumented member of your family gets detained. Who are the kids going to call ? Is there a neighbor or family member who could be there ? Are there is there money set aside to to cover rent or car payments ? Things like that ? Find a good immigration lawyer at Ala is a good resource. They have a searchable database where you can allows the American Immigration Lawyer Association , and they have a search tool that you can find folks in your area. They're specialized in certain aspects within immigration law. I would point them to resources like that , but as grim as it sounds , come up with a plan because being prepared and educated about some of these issues will hopefully eliminate a little bit of that anxiety and stress and fear that people are feeling.
S10: And so that and I would call people's attention to this app that it was created by Human Rights First. Basically , this is an app that people can download to their phones. It's a secure one click Emergency alert system for immigrant families. So you input information ahead of time , and there are a number of different templates that help you come up with , you know , instructions for child care , for legal defense , for financial concerns. And then if you're detained by Ice , you can press click and it sends out your emergency plan to your predestinated contacts. And then it wipes the emergency plan from your phone in case your phone is seized and searched. So I think that is at least a way for people in mixed states , families to come up with some planning around what happens if a person is detained to handle things like , you know , minor children or financial concerns. And then also , I will remind people to if you are detained either by the police or by immigration , everything you say can and will be used against you and non-citizens , unfortunately , in if you're arrested for immigration violations could also be subject to criminal charges. The government , for example , is requiring people to register and it's a failure. Failure to register with immigration is a misdemeanor , and it applies to everyone over the age of 14. So it potentially , you know , the government could start prosecuting people for misdemeanors who are detained even though they have no criminal record and are not doing anything illegal. They're simply being in public in the United States. So anything you say can be used against you. So it's really important never to speak to the police or to immigration authorities without a lawyer. You don't have to be rude about it. All. You all you have to say is , I don't want to talk to you without my lawyer present. I would also be wary about where you go. We've had cases , et al.
S12: Otro lado , where.
S10: People that were not citizens , but that had either were here legally with parole or were had some kind of status , have gone on to military bases and then been detained. We were contacted by an individual who was driving for work , delivering something to a military base , went on to the base and ice was called in. That person ended up in immigration detention. So I if I was concerned about my immigration status , I would not be going on to military bases. I say that because here in San Diego , there's a number of military bases in the area. I would also be aware and just remind people that Ice is allowed to racially profile. The Supreme Court granted permission to Ice last year to use a person's ethnic identity and appearance as the basis to stop them and question them. So unfortunately , if you look quote unquote Latino or if you look quote unquote ethnic , you can be stopped by Ice and they can question you. And to be clear , I am not giving legal advice , but I would urge anyone to consult with an immigration lawyer before they speak with the police or with immigration authorities.
S2: Thank you so much , Cassandra and Gustavo. Obviously , this is a conversation that can keep going for a long time and hopefully we'll have it again. we really appreciate your time and you guys sharing your , your expertise. And just for all the work you do to help people stay informed.
S11: Thank you.
S10: Thank you.
S2: Friends , as you heard in today's episode , it's been a complicated year for people living in the border region.
S1: And an especially difficult one for mixed status families.
S2: If the past year has taught us anything , it's that the next three years are likely to be just as challenging.
S1: We hope our conversation with Gustavo and Cassandra has been both insightful and informative. This episode would also be available in Spanish.
S2: This episode of Port of Entry was written and produced by Julio Cesar Ortiz Franco.
S1: Adrian Villalobos technical producer and sound designer.
S2: This episode was edited by Chrissy Winn.
S1: Lisa morissette is director of audio programming and operations.
S2: Stay safe , everybody , and nos vemos pronto.
