For the first time in a decade, Congress has a real opportunity to deliver a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants. For too long, immigrants who’ve called America home for most of their lives have still been forced to live in fear of deportation and the possibility they could be torn apart from their families and communities.

Congress proposed legislative solutions this year among growing momentum and pressure from constituents. More than 70% of people support a pathway to citizenship for immigrants. But the Senate parliamentarian has ruled against two proposals to put immigrants–including people who came to the country as kids, people with a form of protection called Temporary Protected Status, farm workers and essential workers–on a pathway to citizenship. We are angry, but not defeated.

We recently joined Human Rights Watch and more than 50 other civil rights and human rights organizations to call on the White House and Congressional leadership to find an alternate route to deliver on the long-held promise to enact a path to citizenship and lasting protections for undocumented immigrants. Congress must do its job and get the job done this year. If Congress fails, millions of people will be denied the chance to live free from the threat of deportation, again.

We talked with directly-impacted people about the urgency of this moment.

Paola Garcia came to the United States from León, Guanajuato, Mexico when she was 2-years-old with both of her parents. Ever since then, they’ve been involved in an ongoing struggle to become citizens. Paola’s dad endured a fight for his own citizenship that lasted more than a decade and went all the way to the West Virginia Supreme Court. He eventually won his legal battle, but by that time, Paola had aged out of being given priority status to become a citizen. She is currently protected from deportation by the DACA program, which continues to undergo legal challenge and was never intended as a permanent solution.

“The Biden administration said they would do their best to make some type of immigration reform in the first 100 days,” Paola said. “Those 100 days are up and I’m still waiting unfortunately. The only thing that could grant me access as a legal citizen here would be if there was some type of legislation.”

Paola is urging Congress to pass a pathway to citizenship so she can continue being an advocate in her community without fear of deportation.

“If I could say something to Congress, I would ask them ‘What inspired you from the very beginning to become a representative for people?’ When you think about that answer, most of the reasons they would give are the same reasons that immigrants come to West Virginia, the same reasons that immigrants come to the United States. We want to contribute. We make America richer – not just financially – culturally, physically, mentally, spiritually, all of that. We need all of that, especially right now. America is in a big world of hurt. We need people to take up responsibility. We need people to become community leaders. The majority of us just want to better ourselves, the country, and our communities just like anyone who is in Congress.”

Irma Flores came to the United States 20 years ago following an earthquake in El Salvador.

“I made the decision to come to this country to try to find better opportunities and better education for my son and my daughter,” Irma said.

Irma was granted Temporary Protected Status. She had trouble navigating the school system for her young kids and decided to start educating other immigrant families to help them navigate the schools too.

“My commitment with the immigrant community has been supporting them, bringing services, and letting them know we have rights because that is something we didn’t know when we came to this country,” Irma said.

Irma now has five grandchildren and is fighting for a pathway to citizenship because it will provide stability for her family and allow them to travel to see family members in El Salvador. Her family was hit by tragedy when her father died last year.

“I didn’t have the opportunity to go and say goodbye to him because we can’t. I don’t want that to happen if something happens to my mom. A path to citizenship will help people like us, human beings who have family in other countries and we are not able to visit. We need to have that connection to see our families. I have seen a lot of families in the same situation,” Irma said.

Irma is urging Congress to act upon its promises and deliver for families like hers.

“After the many promises they have given to us, it’s just time,” Irma said.

Omar Salinas-Chacón came to the United States after his family became targets of gang violence back home in El Salvador. Omar is a DACA recipient and says the instability of the temporary program impacts every aspect of his life.

“I have to renew my DACA every year and a half and that’s really as far as I can plan out my life. I would like for that to change,” Omar said.

Omar is active in his community as the Kentucky State Manager of the Save the Children Action Network and a board member for the ACLU of Kentucky. He is asking Congress to pass a pathway to citizenship and to consider the desperation so many immigrant families face.

“I want Congress to think: What would it take for them to pack up their entire family and go to a country where they don’t even know the language? Imagine how desperate you are to do that? We don’t choose to leave our homes. All I’m asking is that I become part of this home I’ve called home for over 20 years now,” Omar said.

Jesús Benavides has lived in the United States for 17 years. He works construction and is involved with his community through La Colmena, a group that organizes immigrant workers in Staten Island.

“In Mexico, the jobs do not pay people enough. I came here to have better opportunities and to help my parents,” Jesús said.

Jesús suffered the loss of his father last year and said the grief has been even more challenging because he is far away from his family.

“Not being able to see my dad was hard. It is hard because sometimes I remember things from there, especially my parents. Not being able to see them, not being able to talk to them in person, it’s hard,” Jesús said.

Jesús is asking Congress to pass a pathway to citizenship for immigrant workers like him.

“They need to work to pass a pathway to citizenship for the millions of immigrants who are here because we’ve been working really hard during the pandemic. We are essential workers who helped New York and the entire country and kept the economy moving forward,” Jesús said.

Texas’ new abortion ban, SB 8, is designed to ban abortion for most people in Texas and encourage anybody, anywhere, to sue a person who performed or helped someone get an abortion in violation of the ban. While SB 8 is uniquely egregious, it’s a stark example of what’s at stake in the nationwide fight for reproductive freedom. Its impact could spread to millions more nationwide if other states follow suit with copycat bills.

Here’s what to know about SB 8.*

*This information was last updated on October 13, 2021, after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed SB 8 to go back into effect only 48 hours after a lower court blocked the law. If you have questions about or need an abortion in Texas, visit needabortion.org.

Is SB 8 in effect?

Yes. Only 48 hours after a lower court blocked SB 8 from continuing to harm Texans, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the cruel ban to once again take effect.

Is abortion legal in Texas under SB 8?

Texans still have a constitutionally protected right to abortion, though it’s a right in name only when SB 8 is in effect. Texas politicians are trying to use SB 8 to run roughshod over the constitutional right to abortion by blocking patients from getting the care they need if they are beyond six weeks of pregnancy.

How far into pregnancy are abortions prohibited under SB 8?

Under SB 8, the state of Texas bans abortions if any fetal cardiac activity can be detected, which is after approximately six weeks of pregnancy, before many people know they’re pregnant.

Under SB 8, is it illegal to get an abortion after six weeks in another state or country?

No. First, remember that SB 8 does not allow lawsuits against the person who receives an abortion. Second, SB 8 does not apply to abortions provided outside of Texas, so helping someone leave the state for care after six weeks would not be illegal. However, it is not possible to guarantee that people attempting to enforce SB 8 will not try to bring a lawsuit against people who refer or provide assistance to patients seeking abortion care outside of Texas.

Under SB 8, is it illegal to donate to a Texas abortion fund if it helps someone get an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy?

Abortions performed under six weeks are not prohibited and SB 8 does not apply to abortions obtained out of state, so funding those abortions is not a violation of SB 8. Moreover, donating money is a protected First Amendment activity. However, it is not possible to guarantee that people attempting to enforce SB 8 will not bring a lawsuit against those who donate to an abortion fund, though the risk of liability is very low. If you wish to donate to organizations fighting forced pregnancy in Texas, you can find a list here.

Where in Texas can you get an abortion?

The following cities have one or more abortion providers: Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth, El Paso, Houston, McAllen, Waco, and San Antonio. For a full list of abortion providers in Texas, go to: www.needabortion.org.

Can patients under 18 get an abortion in Texas?

Yes. However, if you are under 18, Texas law generally requires you to get the consent of a parent or legal guardian. If you are legally emancipated, you do not need the consent of a parent or legal guardian. If you don’t have consent from a parent or legal guardian or can’t ask, you can find more options below.

What if a patient under 18 doesn’t have consent for an abortion from a parent or legal guardian?

A person under 18 can get an abortion without the consent of their parent or legal guardian by filing an application for a judicial bypass. Judicial bypass is a way to get a judge’s permission for you to have an abortion without your parent or guardian’s consent. The process is entirely confidential. If the judge decides that you are mature enough to decide for yourself or that telling your parents would not be in your best interest or could lead to abuse, they will give you a court order that you can take to your doctor. If you think you might need a judicial bypass, there are lawyers who can help. Jane’s Due Process assists minors with the judicial bypass process, including by providing legal representation. You can reach them by phone at 1-866-999-5263 or online at: janesdueprocess.org. Because SB 8 limits the time in which you can get an abortion so severely, you should contact them as soon as possible if you want to get an abortion.

Is abortion safe?

Yes, abortion is an extremely safe and common procedure. At current rates, about one in four Americans who can become pregnant have had an abortion by the age of 45. Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures, and about 14 times safer than childbirth.

Is it true that Texas has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the U.S.?

Yes. Texas’ abortion laws were some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country even before SB 8 was passed. Both the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Medical Association oppose some of Texas’ abortion laws because excessive restrictions on abortion care jeopardize patients’ health. As a result of these laws, there are not enough abortion clinics to adequately serve people in the nation’s second-most-populous state. About 900,000 people who are able to become pregnant in Texas live more than 150 miles from an abortion clinic.

What about the Supreme Court?

On Sept. 1, the Supreme Court turned its back on Texans and allowed SB 8 to go into effect, eliminating access to approximately 85 to 90 percent of abortions in the state.

The fight against SB 8 continues. On Sept. 23 we asked the Supreme Court to hear the case without waiting for further ruling from the Fifth Circuit. In addition to this lawsuit, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Texas to block SB 8 in early September.

As litigation proceeds, Congress must pass the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would provide a nationwide safeguard against abortion bans and medically unnecessary restrictions that push abortion care out of reach. It would protect the constitutional rights of all people, no matter where they live. The WHPA has already passed in the House, and now it’s the Senate’s turn. Send a message to your senator: Defend abortion access for all.

—

For more information on abortion restrictions in Texas, read the ACLU of Texas’ full guide.

Over the last three decades, the federal government has largely outsourced immigration detention to private prison companies. Today, private prison corporations like the GEO Group, CoreCivic, LaSalle Corrections, and the Management and Training Corporation (MTC) own or operate facilities that hold the overwhelming majority of detained people for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

During the Trump administration, ICE expanded the immigration detention system by over 50 percent, signing contracts to open over 40 new detention facilities. This expansion overwhelmingly benefitted private prison companies, which housed 91 percent of all people held in detention centers that opened during those years. In a review of these new contracts, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that ICE failed to adhere to its own process for signing these agreements, concluding that ICE did not have documentation to justify the need for the space. The GAO also found that ICE disregarded the input of staff who advised against the use of several new facilities because of safety issues, understaffing, and poor conditions. In some instances, the Department of Justice (DOJ) had cancelled its contracts to house prisoners at the same facilities due to abuse and poor conditions.

Today, the Biden administration has the opportunity to reverse these trends. But closer examination shows that little has changed. In January 2021, President Biden issued an executive order directing the Department of Justice to phase out its contracts with private prison companies. The executive order instructed DOJ not to renew contracts with privately operated criminal detention facilities, including for Bureau of Prison (BOP) and U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) sites. But the executive order did not apply to ICE detention facilities.

Today, the Biden administration is filling private prison beds emptied out by its own executive order with detained immigrants.

Four Out of Five People in ICE Detention Remain Held in Privately-Run Facilities

Under the Trump administration, 81 percent of people detained each day in January 2020 were held in facilities owned or operated by private prison corporations.

This number remains virtually unchanged under the Biden administration. As of September 2021, 79 percent of people detained each day in ICE custody are detained in private detention facilities.

Private Prison Corporations Continue to Profit from ICE Detention Contracts

In the past several years, contracts for ICE detention made up approximately 25 percent of total revenue for both CoreCivic and the GEO Group. These corporations earned approximately the same amount of revenue from ICE detention contracts as they earned from Department of Justice (Bureau of Prisons and U.S. Marshals Service) contracts combined.

Even in spite of significant population reductions in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, revenues from ICE contracts remained relatively constant for these private prison companies. In 2019, 29 percent of CoreCivic’s revenue came from ICE detention contracts, at a total of $574 million. In 2020, 28 percent of CoreCivic’s revenue came from ICE detention contracts, at a total of $533 million. Twenty-eight percent of GEO’s revenue came from ICE detention contracts in both 2019 and 2020, at a total of $708 million in 2019 and $662 million in 2020.

The Biden Administration is Helping Private Prison Companies Fill Jail Cells Emptied by its Own Executive Order with Immigrant Detainees

As criminal justice reforms have reduced the number of incarcerated people held nationwide, private prison corporations have found themselves with empty beds to fill. Under the Trump administration, private prison corporations found a new source of income: detained immigrants. For example, after Louisiana enacted sentencing reform measures in 2019, the state’s incarceration dropped by almost 9,000 people in less than two years. Faced with the prospect of empty cells, private prison companies in Louisiana secured new contracts to detain over 6,000 more immigrants under the Trump administration. Private prison corporations in Texas also benefited from the boom. In many instances, these ICE detention contracts guaranteed minimum provisions that the GAO has concluded lacked “a strategic approach,” paying private prison corporations millions of dollars a month on unused detention beds. Today, ICE detains 42 percent of all immigrant detainees in Texas and Louisiana alone. At least 11 of these facilities have shifted operations entirely to detaining immigrants.

Even detention facilities that had lost their contracts with the federal government due to poor conditions won new ICE detention contracts—even over the objections of local ICE officials. In 2019, the Bureau of Prisons discontinued its use of the Adams County Detention Center in Natchez, Mississippi after understaffing, lack of medical care, and poor conditions led to deadly riots. Local ICE officers objected to the use of the Adams County facility as an immigration detention facility, but were overridden by ICE headquarters. Soon after, CoreCivic announced that it won a new contract to hold ICE detainees, noting that “more favorable contract terms . . . mitigated the impact of lower occupancy at this facility.”

In January 2021, GEO announced that the Bureau of Prisons had declined to renew its contract for the Moshannon Valley Correctional Facility in Pennsylvania, which was expected to generate $42 million in annualized revenue. GEO then informed its investors that it expected to market the facility “to other federal and state agencies.”

In September 2021, the GEO Group announced that it would reopen the facility as an ICE detention facility. Another federal contract with the Leavenworth Detention Center in Kansas, run by CoreCivic, is set to expire in December, and may also be in line to become another ICE detention facility. CoreCivic is actively attempting to replace its U.S. Marshals Service contract with an ICE detention contract at the West Tennessee Detention Facility in Mason, Tennessee.

This must change. The Biden administration must truly reverse course on immigration detention. It must begin by dramatically reducing detention rates, and investing in proven alternatives to detention, instead of wasting billions of dollars to support the coffers of private prison companies.

This article can be downloaded here.