Related Articles
-Editorial
More than 200,000 people believed to be undocumented have been arrested over the past 30 days, according to data from Immigration and Customs Enforcement. At least 8,000 people have been deported. The majority of countries of origin were South and Central America, but ICE data shows a significant number of arrests of Indians, Chinese, and Russians. ICE has been instructed to arrest at least 1,200-1,500 people per day.
Speakers this week’s Ethnic Media Services panel discussed how immigrants can protect themselves when ICE agents show up at homes, workplaces, and even schools. They also discussed immigrants’ rights while in ICE detention.
For nearly 11 years, La Resistencia, a grassroots organization in Tacoma, Washington, has been at the forefront of advocating for the rights of detained immigrants. The group was formed in response to a massive hunger strike in March 2014, when over 1,200 people in the Northwest ICE Processing Center (formerly known as the Tacoma Detention Center) refused to eat in protest of inhumane conditions.
Maru Mora-Villalpando, founder of La Resistencia and CEO of Latino Advocacy, has been working alongside detainees and their families to expose the harsh realities inside the facility. Over the years, she has witnessed waves of hunger strikes, each one a desperate attempt by detainees to draw attention to unaddressed grievances.
“People in detention are aware that some sort of grievance system exists, but there’s no response to their grievances,” Mora-Villalpando explained. “Many times, there is no response at all. And when there is, it’s often in English, making it inaccessible to many detainees.”
A 2023 report from the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of the Inspector General confirmed what advocates have been saying for years: the grievance system at the Tacoma detention center is broken. With ICE now relying on digital tablets for complaints, detainees unfamiliar with the technology or who do not speak English face additional barriers in filing grievances.
According to La Resistencia, at least 14 hunger strikes were recorded at the facility in 2023. The true number is likely higher, as not all detainees can report their actions due to limited access to outside communication.
Detainees at the Tacoma facility have consistently raised the same demands: better food quality, as many claim the meals are so poor that refusing to eat is not difficult; access to clean clothing and basic hygiene, with reports of detainees being issued used underwear and wearing unwashed uniforms; and adequate medical care, as neglect and medical isolation have led to worsening health conditions. These concerns were further highlighted in a lawsuit against GEO Group, the private company that owns and operates the facility. In 2021, La Resistencia and other advocates successfully sued GEO for exploiting detainees by paying them only $1 per day to clean the facility. After the court ruled that Washington State’s minimum wage law applied to detainees, GEO responded by ending the work program entirely, resulting in worsening sanitary conditions within the facility.
“GEO refuses to pay what they should pay to keep the place clean because their bottom line is profit,” Mora-Villalpando said. “Due to that, we have seen an increase in illnesses, especially infectious diseases. Last month, there was a varicella (chickenpox) outbreak, and right now, there’s another COVID outbreak. At least one unit is currently in quarantine.”
The Tacoma facility has also seen multiple deaths, further raising concerns about medical neglect. In 2023 alone, two detainees lost their lives under troubling circumstances. Charles D. O’Daniel died after spending four years in solitary confinement, during which he was placed in the general population for only two days. He ultimately died alone in isolation. José Sánchez Castro, meanwhile, was placed in medical isolation while experiencing fentanyl withdrawal but received no medical follow-up and died five days later. According to La Resistencia, detainees who participate in hunger strikes to protest such conditions often face severe retaliation from ICE and GEO Group. Retaliatory measures include separating protesters from their units, placing them in solitary confinement, transferring them to other detention centers, or even fast-tracking their deportation.
“The last thing ICE and GEO want is for people to go on hunger strike and make anything public,” she said. “So there will be immediate retaliation.”
While ICE issues public statements acknowledging detainees’ right to protest, Mora-Villalpando argues that these statements are empty words. “They say they respect the right to protest, but the reality is different. People are punished for speaking out.”
Despite the ongoing challenges, La Resistencia continues to fight for transparency and justice. Through direct communication with detainees, legal action, and public advocacy, the organization aims to hold ICE and GEO accountable.
“Every time there’s a hunger strike, ICE might make small concessions—maybe an extra hour of TV, maybe better food for a few days,” Mora-Villalpando said. “But soon, conditions go back to the way they were. The fight continues because the system itself is designed to be inhumane.”
With new outbreaks of illness, worsening detention conditions, and continued hunger strikes, activists like Mora-Villalpando say the battle is far from over.
“We will keep exposing these injustices,” she said. “People need to know what is happening behind these walls.”
Undocumented immigrants in the United States have legal rights and protections, and understanding them can make a crucial difference in encounters with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), according to Amanda Alvarado-Ford, Deputy Directing Attorney at the Immigration Institute of the Bay Area. Speaking at a recent event, Alvarado-Ford outlined key points of her Know Your Rights presentation, emphasizing that knowledge is power.
“We emphasize this is not the time to panic. What we want to do is recognize that we have rights, that we have power,” Alvarado-Ford said. “It is a message of power, not panic.”
Alvarado-Ford, who has spent her career representing low-income immigrants—many of them Spanish-speaking—highlighted the growing concern over expedited removal. This process allows Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to rapidly deport certain non-citizens, sometimes within a single day, without a hearing. However, she stressed that those who have lived in the U.S. for more than two years have the right to a hearing before an immigration judge. “Having proof of documents showing that you’ve been here those two years is key,” she said, advising immigrants to store such documents in a safe place accessible to family members.
She also discussed the critical difference between a judicial warrant and an ICE administrative warrant, which many agents use to attempt entry into homes. “We have the right to insist upon a judicial warrant before opening the door,” she said. “Most times, ICE does not have a signed judicial warrant from a U.S. District Court. Instead, they present an ICE warrant for ‘alien arrest,’ which is not a valid judicial order.” She recommended asking ICE officers to slide any paperwork under the door or hold it up to a window to verify its legitimacy before engaging with them.
In workplace encounters, Alvarado-Ford advised that while ICE may enter public areas, such as reception spaces, they do not have automatic access to private areas, such as back offices or employee-only sections, without a proper warrant. She urged businesses to clearly label private areas and know their right to refuse ICE entry in those spaces.
She also highlighted the importance of legal representation, warning against fraudulent immigration consultants or notaries who take advantage of vulnerable individuals. “Make sure you’re talking to a qualified, licensed immigration attorney,” she cautioned.
During the discussion, a question arose about an airline passenger in India who was ordered off a U.S.-bound plane despite holding a valid visa and traveling with her U.S. citizen daughter. Alvarado-Ford expressed concern and noted that such cases require careful legal analysis. “That individual needs a consultation with an immigration attorney,” she said, emphasizing the need for professional legal advice in complex immigration situations.
Viridiana Carrizales, founder of ImmSchools, understands this issue firsthand.
“This is something very personal for me,” Carrizales said. “I was an undocumented student myself. My parents were undocumented. We walked through the desert to come to this country when I was 11 years old with my mother and younger sibling, searching for better opportunities—especially educational opportunities.”
Eight years ago, Carrizales founded ImmSchools to change the experiences that undocumented students face in K-12 education.
“When I arrived in the U.S., I quickly learned that schools were not safe for me or my parents,” she recalled. “I overheard a school staff member ask a parent for a driver’s license. I remember telling my parents not to come to school because they didn’t have one.”
Her experience in high school was just as troubling.
“When I was a senior, I told my high school counselor I didn’t have a Social Security number. He thought the best thing to do was to call immigration to see how they could get me one,” Carrizales said. “I found myself talking to an immigration official in my counselor’s office.”
Determined to prevent other students from facing similar fears, Carrizales launched ImmSchools, which works with educators nationwide to ensure they understand students’ legal rights and can better support them.
“We’ve been training teachers, front-office staff, and principals, while also providing direct information to students and families,” she said.
Recent policy changes have intensified concerns among immigrant parents.
“This is not new. This is not the first time we’re hearing about raids, family separations, and the impact of immigration policies,” Carrizales noted. “But the recent changes, especially those affecting schools, have caused a lot of fear.”
Some parents are now questioning whether they should bring their children to school at all.
“Some have already withdrawn their kids,” she said. “If children aren’t attending school, we all lose. We are all impacted.”
According to Carrizales, approximately 5.5 million children in K-12 schools are either undocumented or live with at least one undocumented parent. Most of these children are U.S. citizens.
“That’s 5.5 million families wondering if it’s safe to send their kids to school or even put them on a school bus,” she said.
Despite the fear, Carrizales emphasized that undocumented students have legal rights in schools.
“In 1982, the Supreme Court ruled in Plyler v. Doe that every child in this country—regardless of immigration status—has the legal right to attend K-12 schools,” she said. “Schools cannot ask, collect, or document a student’s immigration status. They cannot ask parents if they’re undocumented. That would be a violation of students’ rights.”
Additionally, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) protects students’ records.
“If an immigration agent comes to a school, they cannot automatically get information about a student,” Carrizales explained. “That information is protected. Schools must have a judicial warrant or parental permission to release it.”
Carrizales urged school staff to be aware of these protections and to establish clear protocols to handle potential encounters with immigration officials.
“We’re telling schools to train their front-office staff so they know who is responsible for interacting with immigration agents and to minimize disruptions to students’ learning,” she said.
Despite the challenges, Carrizales encourages immigrant parents to continue prioritizing their children’s education.
“Yes, be aware and stay informed,” she said. “But bring your kids to school. Many of us came to this country so our children could have a better future. And it all starts with education.”
Oscar Sarabia Roman, a staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project, recently outlined the organization’s ongoing legal challenges to former President Donald Trump’s immigration policies. Speaking on the subject, Roman emphasized that the ACLU and its partners have filed multiple lawsuits against executive orders that they argue violate constitutional protections and endanger immigrant communities.
“The first lawsuit we filed was against the executive order on birthright citizenship,” Roman said. “We filed it within two hours of Trump signing the order.”
Birthright citizenship, enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, guarantees that every child born on U.S. soil is an American citizen, with only a narrow exception for children of foreign diplomats. Roman warned that Trump’s attempt to alter this principle could create uncertainty for expectant parents, particularly those on visas, and potentially deny newborns access to essential services like healthcare and nutrition.
“This puts newborns at great risk at such a vulnerable stage in life,” he said. “So far, two courts in separate lawsuits have agreed with us and have blocked this illegal executive order.”
Another major legal battle focuses on Trump’s asylum restrictions under the 212(f) proclamation. Roman stated that the administration sought to shut down asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border by invoking a supposed “invasion” as justification.
“This move would put thousands of lives at risk,” he said. “Families and individuals face return to countries where they are at grave risk of persecution, with absolutely no recourse.”
He stressed that Trump’s proclamation disregarded long-standing protections established by Congress and upheld by courts for generations. The lawsuit argues that no president has the authority to unilaterally override these protections.
“We are suing to stop this asylum ban because it defies the law and contradicts fundamental American values,” Roman said.
The ACLU has also taken legal action against the expansion of expedited removal, a policy allowing for the rapid deportation of individuals unable to prove two years of continuous presence in the U.S. Roman described it as an attempt to fuel a mass deportation agenda while stripping immigrants of their right to a fair hearing.
“This policy targets immigrants nationwide,” he said. “Under this rule, immigrants who have been integrated into and contribute to our communities would get less due process in contesting their deportation than they would for a traffic ticket.”
Roman concluded by reminding both non-citizens and citizens of their constitutional rights, including the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. He emphasized that individuals have the right to remain silent and to demand a judicial warrant before allowing law enforcement or immigration agents into private spaces, such as homes, schools, and hospitals.
“These protections still apply, no matter what executive orders are issued,” Roman said. “It’s important to remind people to assert their rights.”
