Why Support Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and its Recipients

Why Support Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and its Recipients

It is common knowledge the wealth and prosperity of the United States was built in part and greatly credited to the labor, efforts and often the exploitation of immigrants. Historically, migration to the United States from Latin America remained a circular cycle until what many sociologists call the “cage effect” took place where the Mexico-U.S border patrol increased and forced migrants to settle. Migration from other locations such as Asia was also encouraged during times of high labor need, for example during the mass construction of railroads. Of course, migration also includes the forced migration or the kidnapping of Africans through the middle passage for free labor in the United States and other locations before the Civil War, mostly, but as we now continued well after (Massey, p. 1–60). And this is just to highlight a few examples. However, just because the motivations and methods of migration evolved and we have lived with migrants for centuries, this does not mean migration and immigrants are no longer a concept of interest. They [immigrants] are not only present in communities across the nation, but are part of these communities and contribute to this country in the same ways many U.S Citizens and native-born individuals do.

How Many of Us [Immigrants] Reside in the United States?

Because immigrant populations in the U.S have been consistently increasing in population and percent since the 1970’s, it is expected immigrants and allies to demand some form of relief for this marginalized population. According to data collected on past U.S Census Bureau’s on the, “foreign-born populations and percent of total population”, in 1970 there were 9.6 million foreign born immigrants (4.7% of total population), in 1980 14.1 million (6.2%), in 1990 19.8 million (7.9%), in 2000 31.3 million (11.1%) and in 2010 40 million (12.9%) (United States Census Bureau, p.1–3). One of the forms of relief granted for immigrant communities was Temporary Protected Status (TPS), implemented by Congress in 1990.

The Who, What, When, Where and How of Temporary Protected Status (TPS)

TPS is a form of temporary protection for undocumented immigrants from countries the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) considers to be unsafe for return due to armed conflict, natural disasters or extraordinary conditions. It protects qualified immigrants from deportation and provides them with a work permit (Harrington, p.75–85). The secretary of DHS has the discretion to decide what countries/territories are eligible for TPS. He/she/they [the secretary] consults with other government agencies, typically the Department of State, the National Security Council, and occasionally the Department of Justice prior to finalizing their decision. According to immigration law, the secretary’s decision on whether to grant TPS or not is not subject to judicial review. After granting TPS, in order to be eligible an individual must fulfill the following: be a national of the foreign country in question or have resided in it, be continuously present in the U.S since the implementation of TPS and DHS guidelines and finally, not be inadmissible in the U.S (Temporary Protected Status: An Overview, p.1–5).

TPS is granted pursuant to statutory authority along with parole while other programs such as Deferred Action, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) and Extended Voluntary Departure (EVD) are the discretion of executive enforcement (Harrington, p.75–85). And, because it [TPS] is not family, employment nor diversity based, it is not under the Immigration Nationality Act of 1965, also known as the Hart-Celler Act (U.S Immigration Since 1965, 2010). TPS is also not an asylee program primarily because it’s not individualized; instead it is a mass inspection of a country/territory while asylum requires an inspection of an individual’s circumstances (Adams, 2018). Finally, TPS does not grant a clear pathway to legal residency in the U.S, it is temporary and up to the discretion of DHS (Temporary Protected Status: An Overview, p.1–5).

Current Beneficiaries of TPS

As of today, the USCIS website lists ten active countries/territories granted TPS (expiration date or status): Syria (03/21/2021), Sudan (TBD, at risk but active until further notice), South Sudan (11/02/2020), Somalia (09/17/2021), Nicaragua (TBD, at risk but active until further notice), Nepal (Terminated, but active until further notice), Honduras (TBD, at risk but active until further notice), Haiti (Terminated, but active until further notice), El Salvador (TBD, at risk but active until further notice), Yemen (09/03/2021) (USCIS Update of Ramos v. Nielsen). The countries labeled “TBD, at risk but active until further notice” are currently at risk because of Ramos et al v. Nielsen where, “the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California enjoined DHS from implementing and enforcing the decisions to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Sudan, Nicaragua, Haiti and El Salvador, pending further resolution of the case. TPS continues as long as preliminary injunction ordered by the court in Ramos, et al v. Nielsen, et al., №18-cv-01554 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 3, 2018) remains in effect (USCIS Update of Ramos v. Nielsen).” On the other hand, the countries/territories labeled, “Terminated, but active until further notice” have in fact been terminated with no plans to renew. However, because of Bhattarai v. Nielsen, USCIS is required to extend TPS to eligible beneficiaries as it was done for Ramos et al v. Nielsen, given the similar issues at hand. So, now that we know what TPS is and isn’t and who benefits from it, what exactly is the issue at hand?

So, what is the Problem?

The issue with the U.S terminating TPS and severely limiting what countries and territories are eligible [for TPS], is that inevitably they would be mass deporting immigrants who were forced to migrate due to the extreme conditions in their home country; deporting them would be to send them back to an economically unstable and crime rampant communities. They [the U.S] would be deporting immigrants that contribute to the stability of the U.S economy and are skilled and essential workers in vital industries.

Unsafe Conditions Abroad

As mentioned before, TPS is granted to countries/territories experiencing extreme conditions such as war, violence or natural disasters. Terminating TPS would force many of its recipients to return to a country where many of its people are misplaced and experiencing the economic, social and emotional aftermath of the turmoil. The following information on contemporary human rights violations and challenges in countries labeled as “TBD, at risk but active until further notice” and “Terminated, but active until further notice” (see “Current Beneficiaries of TPS” above) is mostly and directly from the Human Rights Watch World Report 2019 — their latest and most updated report on human rights violations in over eighty countries worldwide.

Sudan

After seven years of armed conflict in Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile, government officials could still not agree on a system to supply life-saving aid to civilians in need. It has also been reported that in these regions [Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile], military members have attacked and killed civilians. Security agents are also known to attack, fatally wound and detain protesters and activists [in areas apart but also including Southern Kordofan and Blue Nile]. As testified by many victims, while in prison they are subject to months in solitary confinement, beaten, “subjected to electric shocks, threatened with death and rape, and held in harsh conditions.” Moreover, rape culture is deep rooted in Sudan — women and girls can be punished for “dress code violations”, child marriage is allowed in girls as young as ten years old and marital rape is not recognized as a crime (Human Rights Watch, p. 549–553).

Nicaragua

Protesters are kidnapped by police and pro-government groups as part of a “policy” to “eradicate the structural conditions that support opposition voices and critics,” according to the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Some of the abuse protesters reported include, “torture, beatings, waterboarding, electrical shock and rape.” In addition to protesters, journalists are also subject to this abuse as well as have their work (laptops, research, films, etc.) confiscated and professors at universities that support protesters are fired from their positions. As for women, abortions are banned in Nicaragua under any circumstance and penalized with up to two years in prison forcing many to seek clandestine abortions. The Supreme Court of Nicaragua has ruled against two cases that challenged abortion bans (Human Rights Watch, p.425–430).

Nepal

The process of holding people of power accountable for crimes, actions and inactions began in 2018. However, this process was halted and continues to allow fraudulent leaders to continue abusing the rights and misusing funds of Nepalese citizens without consequences. In addition to this, media outlets are highly censored and [Nepal] even forced major media sources to relocate to other countries. Nepal also sends its citizens to work abroad however, “the Ministry of Labor, Employment and Social Security stated that, on average, two migrant workers have died every day during the last seven years (since 2018), primarily, but not exclusively, in the Gulf states (Human Rights Watch, p.421–424).” This is due to the subpar labor conditions Nepalese immigrants face abroad as well as a lack of access to health care. Nepal has given some compensation to selected families of migrants who have died abroad but has failed to support them [migrants abroad] with legal representation when needed and decrease the cost of migration agencies that leave migrants and/or their families with debt. As for the rights of women, girls and the disabled community, in 2016 the government of Nepal planned to end child marriage by 2030 but has halted said plan. As of 2019, Nepal has the third highest child marriage rate in Asia where, “37 percent of girls marry before 18, and 10 percent by 15 (Human Rights Watch, p.421–424).” Moreover, Chaupadi, the practice of isolating menstruating women and girls in sheds or dark rooms, is still in practice in rural communities. Disabled students are also subject to discrimination in schools and lack the resources they need to succeed despite the Disability Rights Act of 2017. Finally, Nepal suffered an earthquake in 2015 that killed thousands and displaced millions. These millions were forced into debt to rebuild their homes or alternatively, were forced to face monsoons and winters displaced and with no proper shelter. Many remain displaced today (Human Rights Watch, p.421–424).

Honduras

Police brutality and corruption as well as government official’s fraud and corruption are a consistent problem; they have one of the highest murder rates in the world. Protesters, journalists, activists, environmentalists, LGBQT+ community members and lawyers are threatened, harmed and oftentimes killed by officials. In fact, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) declared Honduras one of the most dangerous sites for “human rights activists’’ in the Americas. In addition to this, the judicial system is guilty of “influence peddling”, or allowing those in power to influence judicial decisions (Human Rights Watch, p.465–469). As for the rights of women, girls and children — they remain in limbo. Abortions and emergency contraceptives are illegal under any circumstances and women/girls can face up to six years in prison should they use clandestine options. Although child marriages are in theory no longer legal in Honduras as of 2017, according to UNICEF, about one third of girls marry before the age of eighteen. Finally, Honduras has still not yet addressed a criminal code that allows children as young as twelve years old to be tried as adults — an explicit sign of comfort with children’s rights violations (Human Rights Watch, p.465–469).

Haiti

Residents are vulnerable to environmental disasters including tropical storms and earthquakes that kill and displace thousands of Haitians. As of 2018, 38,000 Haitians (70% of whom were women and children) resided in displacement camps, many of which lacked sanitary conditions. While on the topic of displacement, Haiti is developing mining projects that are expected to displace many more residents and prevent “meaningful consultation” on these projects because of their accelerated plans and lack of transparency (Human Rights Watch, p.259–264). As for education in Haiti, 85% of schools are run by private entities and aren’t accessible to many families. Because of this, it is reported half of Haitian children fifteen and older are illiterate and 350,000 are not in primary or secondary school according to the UN Development Programme (UNDP). This forces many families to send their children (many whom are girls from low-income families) to work as domestic workers in wealthy families; here, many are subject to physical and sexual abuse and the promise of pay and education in exchange of labor is broken. Despite these circumstances girls and women are forced into, Haiti prohibits abortions, does not have legislation that criminalizes sexual assault or domestic violence and other forms of abuse against them [women]. Finally, LGBQT+ communities experience homophobia and systemic oppression. As of 2018, the Chamber of Deputies is considering a bill that would “regulate” conditions for the issuance of the Certificat de Bonne Vie et Mœurs, a document that many employers and universities require. The bill list, “homosexuality, alongside child pornography, incest, and commercial sexual exploitation of children, as a reason to deny a citizen a certificate (Human Rights Watch, p.259–264).”

El Salvador

Government officials, military members, police officers, judges and gang members often work together to reach a common goal, persecute and terrorize residents and oftentimes inflict harm and kill them [Salvadorans’] as well. Gang members often harass and force recruit children into their gangs and kidnap women, girls and LGBQT+ members for human trafficking. As for the rights of children, many suffer domestic violence, are killed by gang members and judges have been known to “absolve” rapists who have formed a “family” with victims as young as 12 years old (Human Rights Watch, p.193–197). Women are also not allowed to have abortions and are subject to prison sentences that are decades long if they were to have a clandestine one. Courts often use outdated and discredited evidence to prove girls/women had an abortion and have also imprisoned women who had clandestine abortions because of rape and/or miscarried the fetus (Human Rights Watch, p.193–197). In addition to this, the U.S contributed to the conflict and displacement of Salvadorans during and after the Civil War (1979), “Through the presence of monetary aid, a disregard for the human rights of people in El Salvador, and the presence of U.S. trained soldiers at the then School of Americas and the current Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, the U.S. prolonged and augmented the negative effects of the Salvadoran Civil War (Twelve Years of Terror, p.1–5).” This is a “push factor” and is considered to be the World Systems of Migration theory according to Massay, a sociologist whose research focuses on migration (p. 1–60).

It was necessary to frame the issues of each country whose TPS status is at risk of termination or has already been terminated individually to help readers understand the intersecting and unique circumstances TPS recipients would face if deported today. These are contemporary modern-day human rights violations that have continued and will continue to discriminate and prosecute residents for years to come. One of the key takeaways to learn from this is that a lot of the violence, crime, corruption, human rights violations and instability in these countries is created and supported by systematic and systemic oppression enforced by the elite, government officials, politicians and law enforcement agencies. Their actions and inactions often displace and encourage crime and violence amongst residents. Deporting TPS recipients would subject them [TPS recipients] to conditions in their country the U.S tried to provide humanitarian assistance from by implementing TPS — it would be a complete contradiction to their alleged morals and standards. Terminating and limiting TPS for immigrants of these and other countries would have immigrants and allies (including politicians, judges and lawyers) question the vague and extreme situations and conditions that must take place abroad for the U.S to consider granting or extending TPS. It would also reflect U.S standards and what it would consider grounds for action and alleviating human right violations domestically, and also how the it [U.S] values U.S Citizens, U.S born individuals and those who reside in the country.

Economy

As for economic contributions, nearly 35% of Promise Act Households (Promise Act includes TPS recipients) own their home and pay an average of $1.5 billion in mortgage fees per year; 65% of this is concentrated in California ($268.1 million annually), New York ($258.1 million annually), Texas ($164.9 million annually), Florida ($158.7 million annually) and Maryland ($156.5 million annually). TPS households also pay $2.8 billion in gross rent annually with 66% concentrated in California ($645.6 million annually), Florida ($401.4 million annually), New York ($341.9 million annually), Texas ($251.3 million annually) and Virginia ($341.9 million annually). In addition to this, Promise Act Households contribute more than $35.2 billion to the country’s GDP and more than $4.6 billion in federal, state and local taxes (Pastor et al, 2–24).

Other ways TPS holders maintain the U.S economy afloat is via the vital industries they are the most prominent in. As of 2019, the list is as follows (TPS holders in this industry): Construction (63,228), Accommodation and Food Services (53,893), Administrative and Support and Waste Management Services (42,272), Manufacturing (40,257), Retail Trade (34,696), Other Services Except Public Administration (26,773), Healthcare and Social Assistance (25,500), Transportation and Warehousing (17,373), Wholesale Trade (9,176) and Real Estate, Rental and Leasing (5,763) (Pastor et al, 2–24). All of the job industries previously mentioned are all classified as part of the “Essential Workforce” during the COVID-19 pandemic according to the state of California and most, if not all, also fall under this category [Essential Workforce] in the other 49 states (California for All, p.1–5) (COVID-19: Essential Workers in the States, 2020).

TAKING A STANCE:

Regardless of your political inclinations, personal morals and preferences, identity and views on immigration it is indisputable that this country hasn’t thrived and continues to thrive thanks to the contributions of undocumented immigrants. As the evidence I provided suggests, limiting and/or terminating TPS for current and future recipients would be to deport them back to a country whose leaders actively contribute to the displacement of residents and the violation of their human rights. If crimes caused by immigrants is a high concern for those against TPS, this proves immigrants are victims of crimes themselves and are fleeing these environments; they also go through a multi-step application and background checks to be considered for TPS. Additionally, this would be a contradiction to the original motivations and purpose behind TPS and reflect poorly on the values and morals of the U.S and how it measures justice abroad and possibly consequently domestically and how it values its [U.S] residents. It [terminating TPS] would also affect the economic stability of the U.S massively in a negative way and leave essential industries/jobs with a shortage of workers.

Whatever your motivation is or would be to support TPS — humanitarian or economic — it remains a win-win situation. Supporting TPS and its recipients is a symbiotic relationship between non-TPS holders and TPS holders — Non-TPS recipients guarantee and protect their right to work and remain in the country while they [TPS holders] help the economy and workforce of the country. I urge you to consider the facts and choose what is in the best interest of universal human rights and the economy of this country — support TPS and its recipients.

References

Adams, Johnstone. “What Is The Difference Between Temporary Protected Status And Asylum? — Johnstoneadams.” johnstoneadams. N.p., 2018. Web. 7 Nov. 2020.

California for All. Essential Workforce. 2020. Print.

“COVID-19: Essential Workers In The States.” Ncsl.org. N.p., 2020. Web. 7 Nov. 2020.

“Federal Court Backs Trump’S Order To Kill TPS Program.” American Civil Liberties Union. N.p., 2020. Web. 6 Oct. 2020.

Gonzales, Dalia et al. Promising Returns: How Embracing Immigrants With Temporary Protected Status Can Contribute To Family Stability, Economic Growth, And Fiscal Health. Los Angeles: USC Center for the Study of Immigrant Integration, 2019. Web. 6 Oct. 2020.

Harrington, Ben. “AN OVERVIEW OF DISCRETIONARY REPRIEVES FROM REMOVAL: DEFERRED ACTION, DACA, TPS, AND OTHERS *.” Current Politics and Economics of the United States, Canada and Mexico 20.1 (2018): 75–85. Web. 6 Oct. 2020.

Human Rights Watch. World Report 2019: Events Of 2018. Human Rights Watch, 2019. Web. 4 Nov. 2020. World Report.

Massey, Douglas S, Jorge Durand, and Nolan J Malone. Beyond Smoke And Mirrors. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2002. Print.

“Temporary Protected Status: An Overview.” American Immigration Council. N.p., 2020. Web. 6 Oct. 2020.

“Twelve Years A Terror: U.S. Impact In The 12-Year Civil War In El Salvador.” International ResearchScape Journal 2.5 (2015): 1–5. Web. 22 Oct. 2020.

“U.S. Immigration Since 1965.” HISTORY. N.p., 2010. Web. 2 Nov. 2020.

United States Census Bureau. The Foreign-Born Population In The United States. Print.

“Update On Ramos V. Nielsen.” USCIS. N.p., 2019. Web. 22 Oct. 2020.